Mmft-  ■■ 


>>»;*. 'v«  J.' 


*•■  -"-i-'-'j-i 


-.f^Z-  ■x-:.v,.r.;:;:.:' 


f 


BERKELEY 

LI3RARY 

UNlVEJ?StTY  Of 
CALIFORNIA 


THE  HISTORY  OF 

THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

IN    THE 

CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND 


THE    HISTORY 

OF  THE 

ROMEWARD  MOVEMENT 

IN  THE 

CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND 

1833-1864 


BY 


WALTER    WALSH 

AUTHOR    OF 
'  THE   SECRET   HISTORY   OF  THE   OXFORD   MOVEMENT,"    ETC, 


LONDON 

JAMES    NISBET    &    CO.,    LIMITED 

21  BERNERS  STREET 

1900 


MAIN  LIBRART 


Printed  by  Ballantyne,  Hanson  &*  Co. 
At  the  Ballantyne  Press 


/XK 


PREFACE 

Many  books  have  been  written  on  the  Oxford  Move- 
ment, but  this  is,  so  far  as  I  am  aware,  the  first 
attempt  to  write  its  History  from  the  standpoint  of 
an  EvangeHcal  Churchman.  It  will  be  admitted  by- 
all  that  there  is  room  for  a  distinctly  Protestant,  just 
as  much  as  for  a  Ritualistic  or  High  Church,  record 
of  events  which  have  transformed  the  outward  appear- 
ance of  a  considerable  portion  of  the  Church  of 
England  during  the  past  sixty-seven  years.  I  have 
not  undertaken  this  task  unasked,  nor  without  a  sense 
of  the  difficulty  to  deal  with  such  an  important  subject 
in  anything  like  an  adequate  manner.  But  I  have 
honestly  tried  to  do  my  best,  and  no  man  can  do  more 
than  that.  As  to  how  far  I  have  succeeded,  or  failed, 
others  are  better  able  to  judge  than  I  am.  Although 
an  Evangelical  Churchman,  I  have  certainly  tried  to 
deal  with  my  theme  in  no  narrow-minded  manner.  I 
claim  to  be  as  broad  as  the  Church  of  England,  nor 
would  I  banish  from  her  ranks  any  of  her  loyal  sons, 
though  they  may  disagree  with  me  on  minor  matters. 
I  believe  that  I  have  written  nothing  but  that  which 
will  meet  with  the  approbation  of  old-fashioned  High 
Churchmen  and  Broad  Churchmen,  as  well  as  of  those 

V 

217 


VI  PREFACE 

who  glory  in  being  termed  Evangelical  Churchmen. 
And  certainly  I  have  set  down  nothing  in  malice.  I 
would  not  willingly  misrepresent  my  opponents  ;  my 
desire  is  only  to  tell  the  truth  about  them.  It  is 
human  to  err,  yet  I  have  done  my  best  to  be  accurate. 
Full  references  are  given  for  every  statement  in  this 
work,  and  nothing  is  brought  forward  without  ample 
proof.  I  am  not  afraid  to  have  my  assertions  tested 
by  the  original  documents.  I  claim  that  not  more 
than  one  alleged  fact  has  been  refuted  in  my  last  book, 
The  Secret  History  of  the  Oxford  Movement,  though 
the  Ritualists  in  every  part  of  the  British  Empire 
have  attacked  it  fiercely  again  and  again  during  the 
past  three  years.  Whether  I  shall  be  as  fortunate 
this  time  remains  to  be  seen. 

And  I  have  tried  to  write  in  moderate  language, 
even  about  very  immoderate  and  highly  censurable 
conduct.  There  is  much  recorded  in  the  following 
pages  which  would  justify  stronger  language  than  I 
have  applied  to  it ;  but  I  prefer  that  my  readers  shall 
judge  the  Romeward  Movement  in  the  Church  of 
England  by  facts  rather  than  by  adjectives  of  abuse 
and  insult.  I  cannot,  of  course,  expect  to  please  the 
Ritualists  ;  indeed,  I  think  it  possible  that  they  will  be 
even  more  angry  with  this  book  than  with  its  prede- 
cessor, for,  in  some  respects,  the  facts  here  recorded 
are  more  damaging  to  their  cause  than  those  revealed 
in  the  Secret  History.  The  exposures,  herein  con- 
tained, of  the  conduct  of  not  a  few  of  the  leaders  of 


PREFACE  VU 

the  Oxford  Movement  will  be  unpleasant  reading  for 
their  followers,  as  well  as  for  those  loyal  Churchmen 
who  love  honest,  straightforward  conduct,  and  hate  all 
crooked  ways  and  double-dealing.  It  is  a  sad, 
though  true,  story  I  have  to  relate.  Yet  these  are 
days  when  the  truth,  however  unpleasant,  needs  to 
be  told  without  fear  or  favour,  and  in  the  plainest 
terms. 

No  candid  person  who  reads  this  book  can  fail  to 
see  that  the  destination  of  the  Oxford  Movement  from 
its  very  birth  has  been  Rome.  The  evidence  is  too 
abundant  and  clear  to  leave  room  for  doubt.  For 
Corporate  Reunion  with  Rome  Newman  (in  his 
Anglican  days),  Froude,  Keble,  and,  above  all.  Dr. 
Pusey,  laboured  and  prayed.  They  did  not  wish  to 
go  to  Rome  as  individuals.  They  wished  to  take  the 
whole  Church  of  England,  with  all  her  Cathedrals  and 
Parish  Churches,  and  her  vast  wealth,  with  them — a 
present  worthy  of  the  Pope's  acceptance,  and  on 
conditions  easy  for  him  to  accept.  Nothing  less 
than  this  would  satisfy  them,  and  nothing  less  than 
this  will  satisfy  the  leaders  of  the  Ritualists  of 
the  present  day.  But  before  they  can  succeed  the 
Protestantism  of  the  Church  must  be  destroyed,  and 
the  work  God  did  for  us  in  the  sixteenth  century, 
through  the  Protestant  Martyrs  and  Reformers,  must 
be  undone.  How  they  hope  to  accomplish  this,  and 
the  tactics  necessary  for  such  a  cause,  are  revealed  in 
these    pages.       It   is   an   attack  not   merely  on   the 


Vlll  PREFACE 

Protestantism  of  the  Church  of  England,  but  of  the 
whole  nation  also,  with  which  we  have  to  deal.  What 
affects  the  National  Church  must,  indirectly  at  least, 
affect  Free  Churchmen  also.  They  have  cause  to 
dread  the  Romeward  Movement ;  while  the  Church  of 
Rome  has  cause  to  view  it  with  unbounded  joy.  It 
is  her  work  that  the  Ritualists  are  doing,  and  if  it  is 
allowed  to  go  on  unhindered  we  may  expect  ere  long 
that  the  forces  of  Rome  and  of  the  Romanisers  will 
join  hands,  with  a  view  to  destroying  our  National  Pro- 
testantism by  political  weapons.  And,  therefore,  it 
is  that  I  rejoice  to  see  the  formation  of  an  orga- 
nisation like  the  Imperial  Protestant  Federation,  in 
which  some  twenty-seven  organisations  have  united, 
on  strictly  Evangelical  lines,  to  defend  Reformation 
principles  against  the  attacks  of  Romanists  and 
Romanisers,  quite  apart  from  ordinary  views  of 
Church  polity  and  party  politics.  I  believe  that,  with 
God's  blessing,  this  Federation  has  a  great  future 
before  it,  in  the  Colonies  as  well  as  in  the  mother 
country.  While  Ritualists  are  looking  to  the  Church 
of  Rome  for  unity,  let  true  Protestants  seek  unity 
with  their  brethren  who  hold  the  Evangelical  faith. 
It  was  so  at  the  time  of  the  Reformation.  Cranmer, 
Ridley,  Latimer,  Jewel,  and  all  the  learned  English 
Reformers  sought  brotherly  sympathy  and  help  from 
their  Protestant  brethren  on  the  Continent,  even 
though  they  did  not  accept  an  Episcopal  form  of 
Church  government.     Their  brotherly  letters  one  to 


PREFACE  IX 

another  may  be  read  in  the  publications  of  the  Parker 
Society,  and  in  the  historical  works  of  Burnet  and 
Strype. 

I  have  only  been  able  to  bring  this  History  down 
to  the  year  1864.  If  God  shall  spare  my  life  I  may 
complete  it  at  a  future  date.  It  is  not  a  repetition 
of  my  Secret  History,  but  an  entirely  distinct  work, 
covering  different  ground,  though  here  and  there  I 
have  been  compelled,  in  a  few  instances  only,  to  touch 
upon  subjects  already  referred  to.  The  book  is  issued 
with  thankfulness  to  God  for  the  wide  circulation 
throughout  the  British  Empire  of  my  former  work, 
and  with  an  earnest  prayer  that  He  may  graciously 
use  this  volume  to  open  still  more  widely  the  eyes  of 
the  British  nation  to  the  many  dangers  which  sur- 
round it  from  the  labours  of  a  gigantic  army  within 
the  gates,  whose  dearest  ambition  it  is  to  bring  us 
back  to  the  spiritual  darkness  of  the  Dark  Ages,  to 
the  rule  of  priestcraft,  and  to  the  intolerable  bondage 
of  the  Papacy.  But,  "We  are  not  of  the  night,  nor 
of  the  darkness.  Therefore  let  us  not  sleep,  as  do 
others;   but  let  us  watch   and   be   sober"   (i    Thess. 

W.  W. 
London,  October  30,  1900. 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  I 

PAGE 

The  Reformation  and  Justification  by  Faith — The  Evangelical  Party 
represents  the  Reformers  —  Evangelicals,  and  Puritans  —  The 
Evangelical  Revival — What  It  did  for  the  Church  and  Nation 
— Testimony  of  Canon  Liddon,  Mr.  Gladstone,  Dean  Church, 
Lord  Selborne,  and  Mr.  Lecky — The  Oxford  Movement  not  a 
supplement  to  the  Evangelical  Revival — The  two  Movements 
were  antagonistic  —  The  Rule  of  Faith — The  Founder  of  the 
Oxford  Movement  —  Its  real  object  —  Was  Newman  ever  an 
Evangelical? — Newman's  early  life — Blanco  White's  warning — 
What  Newman  thought  of  the  Reformation  in  1833     .         .         .       i 

CHAPTER  n 

The  Birth  of  the  Oxford  Movement — Newman  and  Froude's  Inter- 
view with  Wiseman  at  Rome — Its  deep  impression  on  Wise- 
man's mind  —  His  bright  expectations  from  it  —  Was  the 
Tractarian  Movement  born  in  Oxford  or  Rome  ? — Keble's  ser- 
mon on  Natio7ial  Apostasy — He  denounces  the  State  and  exalts 
the  Church- — ^Archbishop  Sumner  on  Foreign  Protestant  Non- 
Episcopal  Pastors — The  Tractarians  on  Church  and  State — 
Generally  favourable  to  entire  separation — Dr.  Arnold's  Prin- 
ciples of  Church  Reform — Its  good  and  objectionable  features — 
Newman  wants  to  "  make  a  row  in  the  world  " — The  Conference 
at  Hadleigh — The  Association  of  Friends  of  the  Church — Its 
plans  of  work — Efforts  to  win  Evangelical  Churchmen — "  The 
seeds  of  revolution  planted  " — They  wished  to  bring  back  the 
principles  of  Laud — Clerical  and  Lay  addresses  to  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury — The  Tracts  for  the  Times — Their  Rome- 
ward  tendency — Newman  called  a  "Papist" — Names  of  the 
writers  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times  —  Dr.  Pusey  joins  the 
Movement — Fasting — Roman  Catholic  opinion  of  the  Tracts — 
Exalting  the  priesthood — Dr.  Arnold's  faithful  warning       .         .18 

CHAPTER  HI 

The  first  "  outbreak  of  Tractism  " — Dr.  Hampden's  case — Newman 
on  Subscription  to  the  Articles — He  was  "not  a  great  friend  to 
them" — Hampden   appointed  Regius    Professor  of  Divinity — 


Xll  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

Agitation  against  his  appointment — Lord  Melbourne's  letter  to 
Pusey — Newman's  Elucidations — Stanley's  opinion  of  them — 
Dr.  Wilberforce  and  Hampden — Lord  Selborne  and  Dean 
Church's  testimony  as  to  Hampden's  views — The  real  cause  of 
opposition  was  Hampden's  Protestantism — Proof  of  his  Pro- 
testantism— Extracts  from  his  writings — Vote  of  want  of  con- 
fidence by  Convocation — Hampden's  Letter  to  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury — Mr.  Macmullen's  case — Hampden  appointed 
Bishop  of  Hereford — Protest  of  thirteen  Bishops— Lord  John 
Russell's  reply — Archdeacon  Hare  defends  Hampden — A  Pro- 
secution commenced — Organised  by  Pusey,  Keble,  Marriott, 
and  Mozley — Wilberforce's  eleven  questions  for  Hampden — 
His  answer — The  Bishop  withdraws  his  Letters  of  Request — 
Pusey's  bitter  disappointment — Tractarian  anxiety  to  prosecute 
their  opponents — Bishop  Phillpotts  denounces  the  Episcopal 
Veto — Protests  by  the  Dean  of  Hereford — Hampden  elected 
Bishop  by  the  Chapter  of  Hereford — Protest  in  Bow  Church — 
An  exciting  scene — Consecration  of  Dr.  Hampden — The  new 
Bishop's  sympathisers — Addresses  of  confidence  .        .        .46 

CHAPTER  IV 

Dr.  Pusey's  early  Protestantism — Extracts  from  his  Historical  En- 
quiry—Wis  Theological  Society — "The  young  Monks" — The 
Library  of  the  Fathers — Mr.  Bickersteth  approves  of  the  Library 
— Lord  Selborne  on  the  Fathers — Richard  Hurrell  Froude — 
His  influence  on  Newman — His  admiration  of  Rome,  and 
dislike  of  the  Reformation — Newman's  early  love  of  Rome — 
His  mind  "essentially  Jesuitical" — Froude's  Remains — Extracts 
from  the  Remains^  showing  his  Romanising  principles — Pro- 
fessor Faussett's  University  sermon  against  the  Tractarians — 
The  Rev.  Peter  Maurice's  Popery  in  Oxford — Dr.  Pusey  insults 
Mr.  Maurice — Newman's  reply  to  Faussett — Dr.  Hook's  Call 
to  Union — Bishop  of  O.xford's  Visitation  Charge — The  Oxford 
Martyrs'  Memorial — Pusey  thinks  it  "  unkind  to  the  Church  of 
Rome" — Keble  thinks  Cranmer  a  Heretic — "  Cranmer  burnt 
well  " — Tractarian  opposition  to  the  Memorial — The  inscription 
on  the  Oxford  Martyrs'  Memorial 86 


CHAPTER  V 

Newman  in  1839 — Influenced  by  an  article  in  the  Dublin  Review — 
Remarkable  acknowledgments — Corporate  Reunion  with  Rome 
■ — Preparing  the  way  for  Rome — The  Pastor  of  Antwerp — 
Breakfasts  with  Newman  and  his  friends — Startling  and  trea- 
sonable advice  given  him— Pusey  writes  on  Tende7icies  to 
Romanism — He  pleads  for  peace  in  the  Church— Dr.  M'Crie 


CONTENTS  xill 

PAGE 

on  the  cry  for  peace — Prayers  for  the  Dead — Breaks  v.  Wool- 
frey — West  v.  Shuttlevvorth — Egerton  v.  All  of  Rode — Moresby 
Faculty  Case — Dr.  Pusey  begins  to  hear  Confessions  in  1838 — 
In  1846  he  goes  to  Confession  for  the  first  time — His  Protestant 
notes  in  the  Works  of  Tertullian — Wiseman  hopes  the  Trac- 
tarians  will  "succeed  in  their  work" — He  realises  the  Roman 
tendency  of  their  teaching — Extracts  from  the  Tracts  for  the 
Times — Margaret  Chapel  as  a  centre  of  Tractarianism — Mr. 
Serjeant  Bellasis— Oakeley  claims  the  right  to  "hold  all 
Roman  doctrine" — He  is  prosecuted  by  the  Bishop  of  London 
His  licence  revoked — Pusey  defends  Oakeley — Says  the  judg- 
ment against  him  has  no  moral  force — Pusey  says  he  believes 
in  Purgatory  and  Invocation  of  Saints — Thinks  England  and 
Rome  "not  irreconcilably  at  variance" — Oakeley  secedes  to 
Rome    . 114 


CHAPTER  VI 

Tract  XC. — List  of  Pamphlets  on  Tract  XC. — Newman's  object  in 
writing  the  Tract — -Extracts  from  it — Rejoicings  at  Oscott — 
The  letter  of  the  Four  Tutors — Dr.  Arnold's  opinion  of  the 
Tract — Declaration  by  the  Heads  of  Houses — Interesting  letter 
from  one  of  the  Four  Tutors — -Newman's  Letter  to  Dr.  Jelf— 
Wiseman's  attitude  towards  the  advanced  Tractarians — Ward's 
traitorous  letter  to  the  Univers — An  English  Catholic's  letter 
to  Newman — Wiseman's  reply  to  Newman — Mr.  Ambrose  Lisle 
Phillipps'  letter — The  Bishop  of  Oxford's  difficulties — His  cor- 
respondence with  Pusey  and  Newman — The  Tracts  for  the 
Times  discontinued — Newman's  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford 
— Newman  withdraws  his  "dirty  words"  against  Rome — His 
reasons  for  doing  so — The  Rev.  William  George  Ward — Thinks 
the  Reformers  guilty  of  rebellion  and  perjury — Mr.  Percival's 
defence  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Tidies — Keble's  defence  of  Tract 
XC. — His  opinion  on  Canonical  Obedience  to  the  Bishops — 
Pusey's  defence  of  Tract  XC. — Manning's  dislike  for  Tract  XC. 
— 'QnckntWsfudgtnent  of  the  Bishops  upon  Tractarian  Iheology 
— What  the  Bishops  said  against  Tract  XC.        ....   147 


CHAPTER  VII 

Mr.  Golightly's  letters  to  the  Standard — His  serious  charges  against 
Ward  and  Bloxam — Palmer  of  Magdalen  anathematises  Pro- 
testantism— Startling  revelations — Mr.  Ambrose  Phillipps  de 
Lisle — A  secret  Papal  emissary  to  the  Oxford  Romanisers — De 
Lisle  intimate  with  and  trusted  by  the  Oxford  leaders — New- 
man's Correspondence  with  De  Lisle — De  Lisle  hopes  to  intro- 
duce  some    foreign   Theologians    to    his   Oxford    friends — He 


XIV  CONTENTS 

,  ,,  -  ,  PAGE 

promises  to  be  prudent  and  reserved  "— Bloxam's  fear  of 
publicity — De  Lisle's  extraordinary  letter  to  his  wife — The 
Oxford  men  wish  "  to  come  to  an  understanding  with  the  Pope 
at  once" — Their  proposals  to  be  sent  to  the  Pope — The  Fathers 
of  Charity — A  startling  suggestion — Cordial  meetings  at  Oxford 
between  the  Tractarians  and  Romanists — Negotiations  with 
Wiseman  and  Rome — Wiseman  visits  Oxford — Has  an  inter- 
view with  Newman — Wiseman  writes  to  Rome  for  secret 
instruction  and  guidance — He  desires  to  become  "  the  organ 
of  intercourse"  between  Rome  and  Oxford — A  secret  con- 
spiracy— De  Lisle's  letter  to  Lord  Shrewsbury — It  is  necessary 
"to  blind"  the  Low  Church  party — "Throwing  dust  in  the 
eyes  of  Low  Churchmen  " — "  Unpleasant  disclosures  "  in  the 
papers — "  A  holy  reserve  " — Ward's  double-dealing — Remains 
in  the  Church  of  England  "to  bring  many  towards  Rome" — 
The  ultimate  aim  "  submission  to  Rome  " i8o 


CHAPTER  VIII 

The  Jerusalem  Bishopric — Chevalier  Bunsen's  mission  to  England 
— Puseyite  opposition — Hope -Scott's  objections — Dr.  Hook 
supports  the  Bishopric — His  description  of  the  Romanisers — 
Pusey's  Letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury — Lord  Ashley's 
letter  to  Pusey — Mr.  Gladstone  supports  the  Bishopric — New- 
man and  the  Jerusalem  Bishopric — He  thinks  it  "atrocious" 
and  "  hideous  " — His  Protest — Contest  for  Professorship  of 
Poetry — Isaac  Williams  and  Reserve  in  Communicating  Reli- 
gious Knowledge — Extracts  from  his  writings — Mr.  Garbett, 
the  Protestant  candidate — Samuel  Wilberforce  on  the  contest 
— He  denounces  the  Romanisers — Success  of  the  Protestant 
candidate — Secessions  to  Rome — The  Rev.  F.  W.  Faber — His 
visit  to  the  Continent — His  Sights  and  Thoughts  in  Foreign 
Churches — How  he  deceived  the  public — The  Rev.  William 
Goode — His  Protestant  works — His  Case  as  It  Is — His  Divine 
Rule  of  Faith  and  Practice — Bishop  Bagot's  Visitation  Charge 
— Mr.  Goode  answers  it — The  Parker  Society     .... 


CHAPTER   IX 

Dr.  Pusey's  sermon  on  The  Holy  Eucharist — Denounced  to  the 
Vice  -  Chancellor — The  Six  Doctors — Their  opinion  of  the 
sermon — Private  negotiations  with  Pusey — Pusey  suspended 
for  two  years— His  protest — Dr.  Hawkins'  explanatory  letter 
— Proposed  friendly  prosecution — Lord  Camoys  on  Pusey's 
sermon — Curious  Clerical  Libel  Case — An  extraordinary  Cleri- 
cal Brawling  Case — Protests  against  Puseyism— The  English 
Churchfnan    started    by    the    Puseyites— Newman's    progress 


CONTENTS  XV 

PAGE 

Romeward— He  resigns  St.  Mary's  and  retires  to  Littlemore — 
Archdeacon  Wilberforce  on  "the  insane  love  for  Rome" — 
Pahner's  Narrative  of  Events — Pusey  issues  "  adapted"  Roman 
CathoHc  books  of  devotion — Newman  tells  him  they  will  "  pro- 
mote the  cause  of  the  Church  of  Rome '' — Hook  thinks  "  they 
will  make  men  Infidels" — Extracts  from  these  books — What 
Pius  IX.  said  about  Dr.  Pusey — Bishop  Blomfield  on  the  effect 
of  adapted  Roman  books — Puseyites  advocate  Ecclesiastical 
Prosecutions  of  Protestant  clergy— The  Bishop  of  Exeter  and 
the  Surplice  in  the  Pulpit— Legality  of  the  Black  Gown  in  the 
Pulpit— Ward's  Ideal  of  a  Christiair  Church — Puseyite  attack  on 
Dr.  Symons— Defeated — Attempt  to  prosecute  the  Rev.  James 
Garbett — Failure — Stone  Altars  and  Credence  Tables — Faiel- 
ke/ier  v.  Litchfield — Judgment  of  the  Court  of  Arches — The 
Cambridge  Camden  Society — Denounced  by  the  Rev.  F.  Close  .  226 


CHAPTER  X 

Pusey  thinks  that  God  is  "drawing"  Newman  to  Rome — Pusey 
refuses  to  write  against  the  Church  of  Rome — Newman  secedes 
to  Rome — Father  Dominic's  narrative  of  Newman's  reception — 
Pusey  on  the  secession — Newman  goes  to  see  the  Pope — When 
and  where  was  Newman  ordained  a  Roman  Catholic  ?  Some 
noteworthy  circumstances — St.  Saviour's,  Leeds — Founded  by 
Dr.  Pusey — He  insists  on  an  Altar — The  distinction  between  an 
Altar  and  a  Table — Dr.  Hook's  anxiety— Dr.  Wilberforce  ap- 
pointed Bishop  of  Oxford — Pusey  tries  to  secure  his  goodwill 
for  Puseyism — He  fails — Pusey's  desire  for  Union  with  Rome — 
His  subtle  tactics  with  his  penitents — Hook  believes  Pusey  is 
under  the  influence  of  the  Jesuits — The  Exeter  Surplice  Riots — 
Debate  in  the  House  of  Lords — More  Puseyite  exhortations  to 
prosecute  Evangelical  clergy — An  extraordinary  case  in  Salis- 
bury Diocese — Extempore  prayers  in  a  Schoolroom  "a  gross 
scandal  " — The  case  of  the  Rev.  James  Shore — Pusey's  Sermon 
on  The  Etitire  Absolution  of  the  Pe7iite>it — Extracts  from  the 
Sermon — Pusey  goes  to  Confession  for  the  first  time— The 
effect  of  Pusey's  Confessional  work  on  his  penitents — Testi- 
mony of  Dean  Boyle— Clerical  Retreats 256 


CHAPTER   XI 

Trouble  at  St.  Saviour's,  Leeds  —  Secessions  to  Rome  —  Hook's 
vigorous  attack  on  Pusey — "It  is  mere  Jesuitism"— "A  semi- 
Papal  colony"— Hook  hopes  all  the  Romanisers  will  go  to  Rome 
— Bishop  Phillpotts  prosecutes  a  Puseyite  clergyman  —  The 
Cross  on  a  Communion  Table — The  present  state  of  the  law  on 

b 


XVI  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

this  point — Reducing  the  distance  to  Rome — Sackville  College, 
East  Grinstead — The  Rev.  J.  M.  Neale  inhibited — Freeland  v. 
Neale — The  Gorham  Case — Judgment  of  the  Court  of  Arches — 
Judgment  of  the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council — Puseyite 
Protest  against  the  judgment — Dr.  Pusey  and  Keble  wish  to 
prosecute  Gorham  for  heresy — Bishop  Phillpotts  threatens  to 
excommunicate  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury — The  Exeter 
Synod — The  case  of  the  Rev.  T.  W.  Allies — His  extraordinary 
and  disloyal  conduct — His  visit  to  Rome — The  Pope  tells  him 
that  Pusey  has  "prepared  the  way  for  Catholicism" — What  Mr. 
Allies  told  the  Pope — Allies  secedes  to  Rome— Correspondence 
with  Pusey  on  Auricular  Confession — Startling  charges  against 
Pusey — "In  fear  and  trembling  on  their  knees  before  you" — 
"The  rules  of  the  Church  of  Rome  are  your  rules" — How  the 
Oxford  Movement  helped  Rome — Wilberforce  calls  Pusey  "a 
decoy  bird"  for  the  Papal  net — He  says  that  he  is  "doing  the 
work  of  a  Roman  Confessor" — The  Papal  Aggression— Lord 
John  Russell's  Durham  Letter — Bishop  Blomfield  on  the  Rome- 
ward  Movement — St.  Paul's,  Knightsbridge — St.  Barnabas',  Pim- 
lico — Riots  in  St.  Barnabas'  Church — Resignation  of  the  Rev. 
W.  J.  E.  Bennett — St.  Saviour's,  Leeds — Traitorous  resolutions 
of  twelve  clergymen — A  Confessional  inquiry  by  the  Bishop — 
The  Clergy  defend  questioning  women  on  the  Seventh  Com- 
mandment      284 


CHAPTER  XII 

The  Bristol  Church  Union — Pusey  objects  to  a  protest  against 
Rome— Archbishop  Tait  on  the  Church  Discipline  Act — The 
Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council — Lay  Address  to  the  Queen 
— Her  Majesty's  action  in  response — Lay  Address  to  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury — The  appeal  to  the  Bishops — An  Epis- 
copal Manifesto — A  Clerical  and  Lay  Declaration  in  support 
of  the  Gorham  judgment — The  Confessional  at  Plymouth — 
Revival  and  reform  of  Convocation — Prosecution  of  Archdeacon 
Denison — The  power  and  privileges  of  examining  chaplains — 
The  Archbishop's  Commission  of  Inquiry — The  Archbishop's 
judgment  at  Bath — How  the  Archdeacon  evaded  punishment — 
Pusey  hoists  the  flag  of  rebellion — The  protest  against  the  Bath 
judgment — The  Society  of  the  Holy  Cross — The  Association  for 
the  Promotion  of  the  Unity  of  Christendom — Startling  revela- 
tions as  to  its  early  history — Secret  negotiations  with  Rome — De 
Lisle's  secret  letter  to  Cardinal  Barnabo  —  The  Cardinal's 
answer — Newman  consulted  by  De  Lisle — The  conspirators 
meet  in  London — Their  secret,  traitorous,  and  treacherous  mes- 
sage to  the  Pope — The  case  of  Westertoii  v.  Liddell — Judgment 
-A  Ritualistic  rebel 326 


CONTENTS  XVU 


CHAPTER  XIII 

PAGE 

The  Convent  Case  at  Lewes — Charges  against  the  Rev.  J.  M.  Neale 
— Riot  at  Lewes  at  the  burial  of  a  Sister  of  Mercy — Bishop  of 
Chichester's  letters  to  Mr.  Scobell  and  the  Mother  Superior — 
The  Bishop  withdraws  his  patronage  from  St.  Margaret's,  East 
Grinstead — Threatening  the  Bishop — Mr.  Neale's  pamphlet — 
His  underhand  conduct — Confession  on  the  sly — The  Case  of 
the  Rev  Alfred  Poole — His  licence  withdrawn — His  admissions 
— Remarkable  assertions  at  a  Communicants'  Meeting — Mr. 
Poole  appeals  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury — His  judgment 
The  Lavington  Case — Romanising  books— Theological  Colleges 
— Attack  upon  Cuddesdon  College— Mr.  Golightly's  Facts  and 
Documettts  Showing  the  Alarming  State  of  the  Diocese  of  Oxford 
— An  exciting  controversy    . 3^3 


CHAPTER  XIV 

The  St.  George's  in  the  East  Riots— The  Rev.  Bryan  King— The 
Rev.  Hugh  Allen — The  attitude  of  the  Bishop  of  London— The 
Rector  resigns — Church  of  England  Protection  Society — For- 
mation of  the  English  Church  Union — Its  early  delight  in 
Ecclesiastical  Prosecutions — Opposes  Prayer  Book  Revision 
"at  present" — Dr.  Littledale  advocates  "Catholic  Revision" — 
He  is  "bowed  down"  with  grief,  shame,  and  indignation — 
Expulsion  of  Protestant  clergymen  aimed  at — Preaching  in 
Theatres  "a  profane  and  degrading  practice" — The  Union 
attempts  to  prosecute  Evangelical  clergymen  —  The  Union 
praises  the  Bishop  of  Salisbury  for  prosecuting  Dr.  Williams — 
The  Union  demands  the  prosecution  and  deprivation  of  the 
Evangelical  Bishop  Waldegrave — The  E.C.U.  demands  a  cheap 
and  easy  way  to  prosecute  Archbishops,  Bishops,  and  clergy — 
Tries  to  prosecute  foreign  Protestant  Pastors — The  Church 
Review  says  the  Union  was  established  to  "enforce  the  law" — 
It  declares  that  "to  silence  the  teaching  of  heresy  is  the  plain 
duty  of  the  Church's  Governors" — Dr.  Pusey  prosecutes  Pro- 
fessor Jowett — Pusey  says  that  "prosecution  is  not  persecu- 
tion"— The  Church  Review  praises  prosecutors  as  men  of 
"moral  courage"  —  The  President  of  the  E.C.U.  promises 
obedience  to  the  Courts  of  Judicature 405 


INDEX .        .        .421 


THE  HISTORY  OF  THE 

ROMEWARD   MOVEMENT  IN  THE 
CHURCH    OF    ENGLAND 

1833-1864 

CHAPTER  I 

The  Reformation  and  Justification  by  Faith — The  Evangelical  Party 
represents  the  Reformers  —  Evangelicals  and  Puritans — The  Evan- 
gelical Revival — What  It  did  for  the  Church  and  Nation — Testi- 
mony of  Canon  Liddon,  Mr.  Gladstone,  Dean  Church,  Lord 
Selborne,  and  Mr.  Lecky — The  Oxford  Movement  not  a  supplement 
to  the  Evangelical  Revival  —  The  two  Movements  were  antagon- 
istic— The  Rule  of  Faith — The  Founder  of  the  Oxford  Movement- 
Its  real  object — Was  Newman  ever  an  Evangelical? — Newman's 
early  life — Blanco  White's  warning — What  Newman  thought  of  the 
Reformation  in  1833. 

At  the  Protestant  Reformation  there  was  one  truth  which, 
perhaps,  more  than  any  other,  came  before  the  world  with 
all  the  freshness  and  power  of  a  new  revelation  from  God. 
It  had  been  revealed  to  man  fifteen  hundred  years  before 
in  the  New  Testament,  but  there  it  had  remained  buried 
during  the  Dark  Ages,  unheard  of  and  unknown  to  those 
to  whom  the  Bible  was  a  closed  book.  Men  learnt,  in 
the  sixteenth  century,  with  joyful  surprise,  that  it  was  pos- 
sible to  obtain  absolution  of  their  sins,  and  an  entrance  to 
Heaven,  without  the  assistance  of  any  Sacrificing  Priest, 
and  without  the  aid  of  a  Father  Confessor.  They  learnt 
that  it  was  the  blessed  privilege  of  even  the  vilest  and 
most  sinful  to  go  for  pardon  direct  to  the  Saviour  of 
mankind,  to  approach  direct  to  the  Mercy  Seat,  without 
money  and  without  price,  and  without  any  priestly 
intervention  or  aid.     "  At  the  very  root  of  the  Reforma- 

A 


2  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

tion  changes,"  said  the  Bishop  of  Winchester,  in  his  Visi- 
tation Charge,  in  1899,  "lay  the  principle  of  the  direct 
access  of  the  individual  soul  to  God,  without  human  inter- 
vention of  any  kind,  a  principle  which  destroys  the  whole 
theory  upo  ":  which  the  Roman  Confessional  had  built  its 
power."  ^  This  doctrine  was  embodied  by  our  Reformers 
in  the  Book  of  Homilies,  in  which  we  are  taught,  as  to  the 
application  of  the  merits  of  Christ  to  our  souls  : — "  Herein 
thou  needest  no  other  man's  help,  no  other  sacrifice  or 
Oblation,  no  Sacrificing  Priest,  no  Mass,  no  means  estab- 
lished by  man's  invention."  ^ 

The  acceptance  of  this  grand  and  glorious  truth  made 
our  Reformers  free  men.  It  was  the  death-knell  of  priest- 
craft, and  the  grave  of  Sacerdotalism.  The  cry  of  "  No 
priest  between  the  sinner  and  his  Saviour,"  soon  led  to 
the  further  cry  of  "  No  Pope  between  the  Englishman 
and  his  Sovereign."  The  rule  of  the  priest  was  intoler- 
able for  men  who  were  no  longer  spiritual  slaves,  and 
submission  to  Papal  Supremacy  became  an  impossibility 
for  free-born  Englishmen.  Round  this  great  truth,  this 
doctrine  of  Justification  by  Faith  only,  centred  the  whole 
battle  of  the  Reformation.  Everything  else,  however  im- 
portant in  itself,  was  of  comparatively  little  moment. 
Here  we  have  the  real  heart  and  soul  of  the  Reformation 
Movement  ;  this  is  the  centre  from  which  its  pulsations 
vibrate,  and  from  which  its  life-blood  flows.  Those  who 
preach  it  are  alone  the  true  descendants  of  those  to  whom, 
under  God,  we  owe  the  English  Reformation  of  the  six- 
teenth century.  It  is  quite  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  the 
Evangelical  party  is  new  in  the  Reformed  Church  of 
England.  The  Reformers,  with  scarcely  a  solitary  ex- 
ception, held  Evangelical  doctrines,  while  their  Protes- 
tantism was  far  more  extreme  than  anything  heard  from 
Protestant  platforms  in  the  present  day.  A  study  of  their 
writings,  as  reprinted  by  the  Parker  Society  nearly  sixty 
years  since,  affords  ample  evidence  of  their  hatred  of 
Sacerdotalism.      Evangelical  Churchmen  do  not  represent 

1  The  Times,  October  2,  1899. 

"  Homily  Concerning  the  Sacrament,  Part  I, 


EVANGELICALS    AND    PURITANS  3 

now  the  Puritan  party  of  the  reign  of  EHzabeth,  who 
were  bitterly  opposed  to  the  Episcopal  form  of  Church 
government,  while  Evangelical  Churchmen  were  its  warm 
friends.  The  Churchmen  who  fought  against  the  Eliza- 
bethan Puritans  held  Evangelical  views.  All  other  parties 
within  the  Church  date  their  birth  from  long  after  the 
Reformation. 

Canon  Overton,  a  member  of  the  English  Church 
Union,  proves  conclusively  how  great  was  the  difference 
between  Evangelical  Churchmen  and  Puritans. 

"The  typical  Puritan,"  he  says,  "was  gloomy  and  austere;  the 
typical  Evangelical  was  bright  and  genial.  The  Puritan  would  not 
be  kept  within  the  pale  of  the  National  Church ;  the  Evangelical 
would  not  be  kept  out  of  it.  The  Puritan  was  dissatisfied  with  our 
Liturgy,  our  ceremonies,  our  vestments,  and  our  hierarchy;  the 
Evangelical  was  perfectly  contented  with  them.  If  Puritanism  was 
the  more  fruitful  in  theological  literature,  Evangelicalism  was  infin- 
itely more  fruitful  in  works  of  piety  and  benevolence ;  there  was 
hardly  a  single  missionary  or  philanthropic  scheme  of  the  day  which 
was  not  either  originated  or  warmly  taken  up  by  the  Evangelical 
party.  The  Puritans  were  frequently  in  antagonism  with  '  the  powers 
that  be,'  the  Evangelicals  never;  no  amount  of  ill-treatment  could 
put  them  out  of  love  with  our  constitution  in  both  Church  and 
State."  1 

The  Evangelical  Movement  of  the  latter  half  of  the 
eighteenth  and  the  early  part  of  the  nineteenth  centuries 
was  a  Revival  and  not  a  Birth.  It  did  great  things  for 
England  and  England's  Church,  as  even  those  who  have 
been  its  keenest  critics  have  admitted.  The  testimony  of 
Canon  Liddon,  the  intimate  friend  and  biographer  of  Dr. 
Pusey  is,  on  this  subject,  important.     He  writes  : — 

"  In  its  earlier  days  the  Evangelical  Movement  was  mainly  if  not 
exclusively  interested  in  maintaining  a  certain  body  of  positive  truth. 
The  great  doctrines  which  alone  make  'repentance  towards  God 
and  faith  towards  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ'  seriously  possible  were  its 
constant  theme.  The  world  to  come,  with  its  boundless  issues  of 
life  and  death,  the  infinite  value  of  the  one  Atonement,  the  regene- 
rating, purifying,  guiding  action  of  God  the  Holy  Spirit  in  respect  of 

^  Overton's  English  Church  in  the  Eighteenth  Century,  chap.  iii. 


4  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

the  Christian  soul,  were  preached  to  our  grandfathers  with  a  force 
and  earnestness  which  are  beyond  controversy.  The  deepest  and 
most  fervid  reUgion  in  England  during  the  first  three  decades  of 
this  century  was  that  of  the  Evangelicals ;  and,  to  the  last  day  of  his 
hfe,  Pusey  retained  that  'love  of  the  Evangelicals'  to  which  he 
often  adverted,  and  which  was  roused  by  their  efforts  to  make 
religion  a  living  power  in  a  cold  and  gloomy  age."  ^ 

We  thus  learn  that  the  Evangelicals  were  chiefly  engaged 
on  the  most  important  subjects  affecting  the  glory  of  God 
and  the  salvation  of  human  souls,  and  that,  under  God, 
to  them  it  is  mainly  due  that  true  religion  was  revived 
as  "  a  living  power  in  a  cold  and  gloomy  age."  What 
higher  praise  could  be  offered  to  any  Church  party  than 
this,  which  comes  from  one  of  the  warmest  friends  of  the 
Oxford  Movement  ?  I  may  now  be  permitted  to  cite  the 
opinion  of  Mr.  Gladstone,  who,  in  his  essay  on  "  The 
Evangelical  Movement,"  which  first  appeared  in  the  British 
Quarterly  Review  for  July  1879,  pointed  out  what  he  con- 
ceived to  be  many  serious  defects  in  its  system.  Yet  even 
he  was  constrained  to  admit  that,  "  though  Evangeli- 
calism as  a  system  may  have  been  eminently  narrow  and 
inconsequent,  it  was  born  to  do  a  noble  work,  and  that 
the  men  to  whom  the  work  was  committed,  were  men 
worthy  of  this  high  election."^  Mr.  H.  O.  Wakeman,  an 
active  supporter  of  the  Ritualists,  admits  that,  "  During 
the  latter  part  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  Evangelical 
party  were  the  salt  of  the  Church  of  England."  ^ 

Two  more  High  Churchmen  I  will  quote  before  I  pass 
on.  The  testimony  of  the  first  of  these  proves  that  the 
Evangelical  Revival  was  powerful  in  the  interests  of 
philanthropy,  and  did  not  forget  the  interests  of  the 
body  while  engaged  chiefly  in  looking  after  the  eternal 
welfare  of  immortal  souls.  The  late  Dean  Church  had 
many  supposed  faults  to  point  out  in  the  Evangelical 
Movement  when  he  wrote  his  historical  sketch  of  The 
Oxford  Movement ;  but  he  acknowledged  that 

"  Evangelical   religion   had   not   been   unfruitful,   especially  in 

1  Liddon's  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  i.  p.  255. 

'^  Gladstone's  Gleanings  of  Past  Years,  vol.  vii.  p.  236. 

^  Wakeman's  History  of  the  Church  of  England,  p.  452,  6th  edition. 


LORD    SELBORNE    ON    THE    EVANGELICALS  5 

public  results.  It  had  led  Howard  and  Elizabeth  Fry  to  assail  the 
brutalities  of  the  prisons.  It  led  Clarkson  and  Wilberforce  to  over- 
throw the  slave  trade,  and  ultimately  slavery  itself.  It  had  created 
great  Missionary  Societies.  It  had  given  motive  and  impetus  to 
countless  philanthropic  schemes."^ 

In  this  Dean  Church  was  of  one  mind  with  the 
Evangelical  Lord  Shaftesbury,  who  with  truth  declared  : — 
"  I  am  satisfied  that  most  of  the  great  philanthropic 
movements  of  the  century  have  sprung  from  "  the  Evan- 
gelicals.^ 

The  testimony  of  the  late  Earl  of  Selborne,  at  one 
time  Lord  Chancellor  of  England,  a  decided  High 
Churchman,  though  not  a  Ritualist,  is  important.  He 
says : — 

"  Next  to  the  home  influence  which  surrounded  me,  none  con- 
tributed more  to  preserve  the  balance  of  my  mind  than  that  of  the 
excellent  representatives  of  'Evangelical'  opinion,  with  whom  I  had 
been  brought  into  contact.  There  were  many  things  in  that  system, 
particularly  the  Calvinistic  tenets  held  by  the  most  powerful  of  its 
teachers,  with  which  I  never  agreed ;  and  it  always  seemed  to  me 
defective,  as  leaving  too  much  out  of  sight  the  organic  side  of 
Christianity.  But  in  its  spirituality,  in  its  constant  presentation  of 
Christ  and  His  work  as  the  foundation  of  faith  and  practice,  and  in 
its  reverence  for  the  Scriptures,  I  thought  it  set  an  example  which 
all  might  have  done  well  to  follow."  ^ 

One  of  the  most  bitter  writers  against  the  Evan- 
gelical party  whom  I  have  ever  met  with  is  the  Rev. 
W.  H.  B.  Proby,  an  enthusiastic  supporter  of  the  Ritual- 
istic party.  Yet  even  he,  writing  in  1888,  was  compelled 
to  acknowledge  its  services  both  to  the  Church  of 
England  and  to  the  cause  of  practical  godliness. 

"And  what,  with  all  this  dignity  and  influence,"  he  asks,  "had 
the  Low  Church  party  effected  ?  They  had  effected  a  true  conver- 
sion to  God  in  Christ  in  the  cases  of  numberless  individuals,  and 
they  had  effected  certain  reforms  and  improvements  in  the  English 
Church  at  large,  tending  to  the  edification  of  individuals.      Then 

1  The  Oxford  Movement.     By  Dean  Church,  p.  13,  ist  edition. 
'  Life  and  Work  of  the  Seventh  Earl  of  Shaftesbury,  popular  edition,  p.  519. 
^  Memorials  Family  and  Personal,  1766-1865.    By  the  Earl  of  Selborne,  vol.  i. 
p.  211. 


6  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

they  had  been  the  means  of  improving  the  psalmody,  by  the  singing 
of  hymns,  the  psalmody  having  previously  been  confined  almost 
entirely  to  the  performance  of  metrical  versions  of  Psalms.  They 
had  caused  the  public  service  of  the  Church  to  be  gone  through 
generally  in  a  more  becoming  manner  than  had  too  often  been 
customary ;  doubtless  through  practising  the  same  rule  which  in 
later  times  was  formulated  by  Charles  Simeon,  of  Cambridge,  *  Do 
not  read  the  prayers,  but  pray  them.'  .  .  .  There  was,  besides,  an 
improvement  of  the  outward  face  of  society  at  large.  There  was 
less  drunkenness  in  the  upper  classes,  less  indecent  language,  and 
less  profane  swearing.  Shops  were  not  so  frequently  opened  on 
Good  Friday.  And  of  course  there  was  an  improvement  in  the 
general  efificiency  of  the  clergy;  that  is  to  say,  owing  to  the  Low 
Church  movement  there  were  more  religious  clergymen  than  there 
had  ever  been  before.  There  was  an  increased  care  about  Divine 
Service :  the  Prayer  Book  (so  far,  that  is,  as  Low  Churchmen  chose, 
or  had  learnt  to  use  it)  was  used  more  devoutly ;  several  parts  of  the 
system  of  religion  inculcated  by  the  Church  of  England  began  to  be 
made  of  more  account  than  they  had  been ;  people  learned  to  come 
to  church  in  time  for  the  commencement  of  the  prayers  ]  people 
were  induced  to  join  in  the  Aniens  and  responses  aloud."  ^ 

Many  of  my  readers  will,  I  doubt  not,  be  influenced 
on  this  subject  by  the  opinion  of  an  historian,  who  would 
pay  but  little  attention  to  the  opinion  of  divines.  I  may 
therefore  appeal  to  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Lecky,  who  also 
criticises  the  Evangelical  party,  but  is  constrained  to  ac- 
knowledge their  valuable  services  to  the  country. 

"Great,  however,"  he  remarks,  "as  was  the  importance  of  the 
Evangelical  Revival  in  stimulating  these  [philanthropic]  efforts,  it  had 
other  consequences  of  perhaps  a  wider  and  more  enduring  influence. 
Before  the  close  of  the  century  in  which  it  appeared,  a  spirit  had  begun 
to  circulate  in  Europe  threatening  the  very  foundations  of  society  and 
belief.  The  revolt  against  the  supernatural  theory  of  Christianity 
which  had  been  conducted  by  Voltaire  and  the  Encyclopaedists  .  .  . 
had  produced  in  France  a  revolutionary  spirit,  which  in  its  intensity 
and  its  proselytising  fervour  was  unequalled  since  the  days  of  the 
Reformation.  .  .  .  Religion,  property,  civil  authority,  and  domestic 
life  were  all  assailed,  and  doctrines  incompatible  with  the  very 
existence  of  government  were   embraced   by  multitudes  with   the 

^  Annals  of  the  Low  Church  Party.     By  the  Rev,  W.  H.  B.  Proby,  vol.  i. 
PP-  350-352. 


MR.    LECKY    ON    THE    EVANGELICALS  7 

fervour  of  a  religion.  England,  on  the  whole,  escaped  the  contagion. 
Many  causes  conspired  to  save  her,  but  among  them  a  prominent 
place  must,  I  believe,  be  given  to  the  new  and  vehement  religious 
enthusiasm  which  was  at  that  very  time  passing  through  the  middle 
and  lower  classes  of  the  people,  which  had  enlisted  in  its  service 
a  large  proportion  of  the  wilder  and  more  impetous  reformers,  and 
which  recoiled  with  horror  from  the  anti-Christian  tenets  that  were 
associated  with  the  Revolution  in  France."  ^ 

To  have  contributed  thus  powerfully  towards  preserv- 
ing England  from  Atheism  and  the  horrors  of  the  French 
Revolution  constitutes,  I  venture  to  suggest,  a  strong 
claim  on  the  gratitude  of  all  patriots  to  the  Evangelical 
party.  Referring  to  the  Evangelical  leaders  of  the  latter 
part  of  the  eighteenth  and  the  commencement  of  the  nine- 
teenth centuries,  Mr.  Lecky  afhrms  that : — 

"All  these  possessed,  in  an  eminent  degree,  the  qualities  of 
heart  and  mind  that  influence  great  masses  of  men;  and  they 
and  their  colleagues  gradually  changed  the  whole  spirit  of  the 
English  Church.  They  infused  into  it  a  new  fire  and  passion  of 
devotion,  kindled  a  spirit  of  fervent  philanthropy,  raised  the 
standard  of  clerical  duty,  and  completely  altered  the  whole  tone 
and  tendency  of  the  preaching  of  its  ministers.  Before  the  close  of 
the  [eighteenth]  century  the  Evangelical  Movement  had  become  the 
almost  undisputed  centre  of  religious  activity  in  England,  and  it 
continued  to  be  so  till  the  rise  of  the  Tractarian  Movement  of  1833."  ^ 

The  Tractarian  Movement  has  been  to  the  Evangelical 
Movement  what  the  Jesuit  Order  was  to  the  Reformation. 
It  has  paralysed  the  energies  of  every  Evangelical  who  has 
yielded  to  its  influence.  It  has  been  frequently  asserted 
that  the  new  Sacerdotal  Revival  in  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land is  only  supplementary  to  the  Evangelical  Movement 
and  is  not  opposed  to  it.  "The  High  Church  Revival," 
writes  Canon  Overton,  "  was  not  the  antagonist  but  the 
supplement  of  the  Evangelical  Revival  which  preceded 
it."^  And  Canon  Liddon  asserts  that  "the  Oxford  Move- 
ment was  a  completion  of  the  earlier  Revival  of  religion 

^  Lecky's  History  of  England,  vol.  iii.  pp.  145,  146,  edition  1892. 

*  Ibid.  p.  134. 

*  I'/ie  Anglican  Revival.     By  J.  H.  Overton,  D.D.,  p.  15. 


8  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

known  as  Evangelical."^  Mr.  H.  O.  Wakeman  asserts 
that  the  Oxford  Movement  "  did  not  so  much  supersede 
the  Caroline,  Latitudinarian,  and  Evangelical  Movements 
as  supplement  them."  ^  To  all  this,  so  far  at  least  as  it 
applies  to  the  Evangelicals,  I  reply  by  denying  that  the 
Oxford  Movement  was  either  the  "  supplement "  to  or 
the  "  completion "  of  the  Evangelical  Revival  ;  and  by 
asserting  most  emphatically  that  its  attitude  was  distinctly 
antagonistic.  If  in  any  sense  it  was  a  "  supplement "  it 
was  in  the  sense  that  poison  is  a  supplement  to  whole- 
some food.  The  chief  characteristics  of  Evangelical 
religion  can  never  be  reconciled  with  the  Sacerdotal 
system.  The  Evangelical  theory  that  Divine  grace  with 
pardon  of  sins  is  conveyed  directly  to  each  individual  soul 
by  God  Himself,  through  Jesus  Christ,  our  only  Mediator, 
and  not  by  Sacramental  elements  or  priestly  absolution, 
can  never  be  reconciled  with  the  general  teaching  of  the 
early  Tractarians  and  their  successors  of  the  present  day. 
That  well-known  champion  of  Ritualism,  the  late  Rev. 
Dr.  Littledale,  perceived  and  acknowledged  this  thirty 
years  since.  He  said:  ''And  first,  it  ought  to  be  said 
that  they  [the  '  Catholic  and  Protestant ']  are  logically  two 
distinct  religions,  and  not  merely  differing  aspects  of  the 
same  religion.  They  are  quite  as  diverse  from  each  other 
as  Judaism  is  from  Islam  ;  though  like  these  two  creeds, 
they  have  a  common  stock  of  books,  sacred  names,  and 
ideas."  And,  again  :  "  But  the  real  fact,  that  these  two 
systems  are  rival  religions,  can  easily  be  discovered  by 
considering  what  we  mean  by  Religion."  ^  Another  char- 
acteristic of  Evangehcal  teaching  is  the  doctrine  that  the 
Bible  is  the  sole  and  only  Rule  of  Faith,  and  a  claim  to 
the  right  of  Private  Judgment  ;  while  that  of  the  Trac- 
tarians and  Ritualists  is  that  Tradition  also  forms  a  part 
of  the  Christian's  Rule  of  Faith,  and  that  Private  Judgment 
is  a  thing  to  be  condemned.  The  ingenuity  of  man  can 
never  reconcile  these  opposing  theories  together,  or  prove 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pitsey,  vol.  i.  p.  254. 

^  Wakeman's  History  of  the  Church  of  England.,  p.  491. 

^  The  Two  Religiotis.     By  Richard  F.  Littledale,  LL.D.,  pp.  2,  3.     London  : 
G.  J.  Palmer.     1870. 


RIVETING    THE    CHAINS    OF    PRIESTCRAFT  9 

that  the  one  is  but  the  supplement  to  the  other.  In  this 
connection  it  is  worthy  of  note  that  one  of  the  first  blows 
struck  by  the  leaders  of  the  Oxford  Movement  was  aimed 
against  direct  access  to  God  for  pardon  of  sins,  and  with 
the  object  of  riveting  once  more  on  English  Churchmen 
the  intolerable  chains  of  priestcraft.  Writing  to  the  Hon. 
and  Rev.  A.  P.  Percival,  on  August  14,  1833,  the  Rev. 
Richard  Hurrell  Froude  announced  : — 

"  Since  I  have  been  back  to  Oxford,  Keble  has  been  here,  and 
he,  and  Palmer,  and  Newman,  have  come  to  an  agreement,  that 
the  points  which  ought  to  be  put  forward  by  us  are  the  following : — 

"  '(1)  The  doctrine  of  Apostolic  Succession  as  a  rule  of  practice, 
i.e.  that  the  participation  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  is  essential 
to  the  maintenance  of  Christian  life  and  hope  in  each  individual. 

"  '  (2)  That  it  is  conveyed  to  individual  Christians  only  by  the  hands 
of  the  successors  of  the  Apostles,  and  their  delegates.' "  ^ 

Here  it  is  implied  that  something  which  "  is  essential 
to  the  maintenance  of  Christian  life,"  can  "only"  be  "con- 
veyed to  individual  Christians,"  not  direct  by  the  Saviour 
Himself,  but  by  "  the  successors  of  the  Apostles,"  a  term 
which,  in  the  estimation  of  the  Tractarians,  excluded  all 
ministers  who  did  not  possess  Episcopal  ordination. 
Here  we  have  the  essence  of  Sacerdotalism,  taught  by 
the  founders  of  the  Oxford  Movement  within  a  month 
from  its  birth.  In  1835  Newman  declared,  in  his  "Ad- 
vertisement "  to  the  second  volume  of  the  Tracts  for  the 
Times,  that  "the  essence  of  Sectarian  Doctrine"  was  found 
in  those  who  "  consider  faith,  and  not  the  Sacraments,  as 
the  instrument  of  justification  "  : — 

"We  have,"  he  exclaimed,  "almost  embraced  the  doctrine,  that 
God  conveys  grace  only  through  the  instrumentality  of  the  mental 
energies,  that  is,  throtigh  faith,  prayer,  active  spiritual  contempla- 
tions, or  (what  is  called)  comiminion  with  God,  in  contradiction  to 
the  primitive  view,  according  to  which  the  Church  and  her  Sacra- 
ments are  the  ordained  and  direct  visible  means  of  conveying  to  the 
soul  what  is  in  itself  supernatural  and  unseen."  ^ 

^  Percival's  Collection  of  Papers  connected  with  the  Theological  Movement  of 
'^^Z'h':  P-  12.     ^^ James  Skinner,"  p.  2. 
*  Trcuts  for  the  Times,  vol.  ii.  p.  vi. 


10  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

This  doctrine,  that  "  visible  "  things,  viz.,  priests  and 
Sacramental  elements,  "  convey  to  the  soul "  Divine  grace, 
instead  of  its  being  conveyed  "  through  faith "  and  by 
"communion  with  God,"  has  been  the  general  teaching 
of  the  Tractarians  and  their  successors  from  1833  to  the 
present  time.  In  recent  years,  however,  it  has  been  ex- 
pressed in  clearer  and  more  daring  language.  The  so- 
called  "  Cowley  Fathers  "  teach  that : — 

"  They  (priests)  are  peacemakers  under  Him  who  carry  on  this 
work  for  Him,  applying  the  precious  Blood  to  the  souls  of  men  by 
the  Sacraments  for  the  remission  of  sins."^ 

The  Rev.  Edward  Stuart,  formerly  Vicar  of  St.  Mary 
Magdalene,  Munster  Square,  London,  actually  had  the 
daring  to  write  : — 

"  God  alone  is  the  Giver  of  all  spiritual  life  and  grace  and  favour, 
and  yet  we  are  not  bid  to  go  direct  to  God  for  these  gifts  (/cr  that 
right  we  forfeited  at  the  Fall),  but  we  are  to  go  to  the  Church  which 
stands  between  us  and  God  in  its  appointed  sphere."  ^ 

On  the  subject  of  the  Bible  as  the  only  Rule  of  Faith, 
and  the  right  and  duty  of  Private  Judgment  in  its  inter- 
pretation, the  teaching  of  Evangelical  Churchmen  is,  as 
I  have  just  asserted,  irreconcilably  opposed  to  that  of 
Tractarians  and  Ritualists.  As  early  as  the  month  of 
September  1833 — only  two  months  after  the  birth  of 
the  Oxford  Movement — Mr.  Newman  published  his  views 
on  these  gravely  important  questions.  No  amount  of 
sophistry  could  persuade  a  Protestant  Churchman  to 
accept  his  teaching  : — 

"Surely,"  wrote  Mr.  Newman,  "the  Sacred  Volume  was  never 
intended,  and  is  not  adapted,  to  teach  us  our  creed  j  however  certain 
it  is  that  we  can  prove  our  creed  from  it,  when  it  has  once  been 
taught  us,  and  in  spite  of  individual  producible  exceptions  to  the 
general  rule.  From  the  very  first,  that  rule  has  been,  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  that  the  Church  should  teach  the  truth,  and  then  should  appeal 
to  Scripture  in  vindication  of  its  own  teaching.  And  from  the  first,  it 
has  been  the  error  of  heretics  to  neglect  the  information  thus  pro- 

^  The  Evangelist  Library  :  Exposition  of  the  Beatitudes,  p-  31. 
*  The  Mediation  of  the  Church.     By  the  Rev.  Edward  Stuart,  p.  9. 


THE    BIBLE    AND    PRIVATE   JUDGMENT  II 

vided  for  them,  and  to  attempt  of  themselves  a  work  to  which  they 
are  unequal,  the  eliciting  a  systematic  doctrine  from  the  scattered 
notices  of  the  truth  which  Scripture  contains.  .  .  .  The  insufficiency 
of  the  mere  private  study  of  Holy  Scripture  for  arriving  at  the  exact 
and  entire  truth  which  Scripture  really  contains,  is  shown  by  the 
fact,  that  creeds  and  teachers  have  ever  been  divinely  provided."  ^ 

When,  in  1837,  Mr.  Newman  published  his  Lectures  on 
Popular  Protestantism,  he  expressed  himself  more  clearly 
and  strongly  : — 

"Accordingly,"  he  said,  "acute  men  among  them  [Protestants] 
see  that  the  very  elementary  notion  which  they  have  adopted,  of  the 
Bible  without  note  or  comment  being  the  sole  authoritative  Judge  in 
controversies  of  faith,  is  a  self-destructive  principle."  2 

"For  though  we  consider  Scripture  a  satisfactory,  we  do  not  con- 
sider it  our  sole  informant  in  divine  truths.  We  have  another  source 
of  information  in  reserve,  as  I  shall  presently  show.  .  .  .  We  rely 
on  Antiquity  to  strengthen  such  intimations  of  doctrine  as  are  but 
faintly,  though  really,  given  in  Scripture.''  ^ 

"I  would  not  deny  as  an  abstract  proposition  that  a  Christian 
may  gain  the  whole  truth  from  the  Scriptures,  but  would  maintain 
that  the  chances  are  very  seriously  against  a  given  individual.  I 
would  not  deny,  rather  I  maintain  that  a  religious,  wise,  and  in- 
tellectually gifted  man  will  succeed  :  but  who  answers  to  this  de- 
scription but  the  collective  Church  .''  "  * 

Of  the  Rev.  Richard  Hurrell  Froude,  one  of  the 
principal  founders  of  the  Tractarian  Movement,  Cardinal 
Newman  states  that : — "  He  felt  scorn  of  the  maxim, 
'The  Bible  and  the  Bible  only  is  the  religion  of  Pro- 
testants ' ;  and  he  gloried  in  accepting  Tradition  as  a  main 
instrument  of  religious  teaching."  ^ 

A  refutation  of  the  assertions  in  these  extracts  would 
take  up  several  chapters  of  this  work,  and  would  be 
generally  considered  out  of  place  here.  But  I  am  happy 
to  state  that  they  have  all  been  ably  and  amply  discussed 
and   refuted   in    Dean    Goode's   Divine   Rule   of  Faith   and 

^  The  Arians  in  the  Fourth  Century.     By  the  Rev.  J.  H.  Newman,  p.  50, 
7th  edition. 

"^  Newman's  Via  Media,  vol.  i.  p.  27,  edition  1891. 

"  Ibid.  pp.  28,  29. 

'>■  Ibid.  p.  158. 

*  Newman's  Apologia  Pro  Vita  Sua,  1st  edition,  p.  85. 


12  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Practice,^  one  of  the  most  valuable  works  on  the  subject 
ever  produced  by  an  Evangelical  Churchman.  It  seems 
a  pity  that  it  has  never  yet  been  issued  in  a  condensed 
form  in  one  volume.  I  need  only  remark  here  that  once 
a  Christian  man  gives  up  the  theory  that  the  Bible  and 
the  Bible  alone  contains  a  perfect  Rule  of  Faith,  and  at 
the  same  time  discards  the  use  of  Private  Judgment,  he  is 
open  to  believe  any  false  doctrine,  however  preposterous 
it  may  be.  The  ridiculous  superstitions  now  advocated 
by  the  Ritualists  may  be  appealed  to  in  proof  of  this 
assertion. 

Who  was  the  founder  of  the  Oxford  Movement  ? 
Cardinal  Newman  asserts  that  ''the  true  and  primary 
author  of  it "  was  the  Rev.  John  Keble.^  No  doubt 
Newman  was  better  qualified  than  any  other  man  to 
express  an  opinion  on  this  question,  yet  no  one  who  has 
carefully  studied  the  early  history  of  the  Movement  can 
fail  to  see  that  the  principal  worker  and  the  most  prominent 
figure  was  Newman  himself.  The  ostensible  cause  of  its 
birth  was  the  alleged  encroachments  of  the  State  on  the 
province  of  the  Church,  more  especially  as  manifested  in 
the  proposal  of  the  Irish  Church  Temporalities  Bill  to 
suppress  a  large  number  of  the  Bishoprics  of  the  Church 
of  Ireland,  and  the  demands  of  men  like  Dr.  Arnold  to 
enlarge  the  borders  of  the  Establishment  so  as  to  embrace 
Dissenters.  The  real  reason  was  the  desire  to  exalt  the 
clergy  into  a  sacerdotal  caste,  and  to  bring  the  laity  under 
the  rule  of  the  priesthood,  with  a  view  to  the  Reunion  of 
Christendom.  The  way  for  the  movement  had  been  pre- 
pared by  the  publication  of  Keble's  Christian  Year  in  1827, 
and  many  of  the  chief  actors  had  themselves  been  prepared 
by  study  and  conversations  with  each  other,  for  the  part  they 
were  about  to  take  in  the  work  before  them.  It  is  quite  a 
mistake  to  suppose  that  the  founders  commenced  the 
Oxford  Movement  while  sound  Protestants.  I  know  that 
Newman  is  said  to  have  been  originally  an  Evangelical. 

^  The  Divine  Rule  of  Faith  and  Practice,  2nd  edition.     By  William  Goode, 
M.A.     Three  vols.     London  :  J.  H.  Jackson.     1853. 
*  Newman's  Apologia,  p.  75. 


WAS    NEWMAN    AN    EVANGELICAL?  1 3 

It  is  true  that  he  was  brought  up  under  Evangelical  in- 
fluence, but  I  do  not  believe  that  he  ever  accepted  the 
system  in  its  entirety.  A  true  Evangelical  is  one  in  heart 
as  well  as  in  name,  whose  soul  and  life  are  moved  by  its 
Gospel  teaching,  and  not  merely  his  intellect.  Much  ado 
is  made  about  his  "  conversion  "  in  his  young  days,  yet 
after  all  it  is  evident  that  what  he  meant  by  it  was  some- 
thing different  from  what  Evangelicals  themselves  mean 
by  the  term  "  conversion."  In  his  "  Autobiographical 
Memoir,"  written  in  1874,  he  speaks  of  himself  in  the 
third  person.     In  it  he  affirms  : — 

"And,  in  truth,  much  as  he  [Newman]  owed  to  the  Evangelical 
teaching,  so  it  was  he  never  had  been  a  genuine  Evangelical.  That 
teaching  had  been  a  great  blessing  for  England ;  .  .  .  but,  after  all,  the 
Evangelical  teaching,  considered  as  a  system  and  in  what  was  pecuhar 
to  itself,  had  from  the  first  failed  to  find  a  response  in  his  own 
religious  experience,  as  afterwards  in  his  parochial.  He  had  indeed 
been  converted  by  it  to  a  spiritual  life,  and  so  far  his  experience 
bore  witness  to  its  truth ;  but  he  had  not  been  converted  in  that 
special  way  which  it  laid  down  as  imperative,  but  so  plainly  against 
rule,  as  to  make  it  very  doubtful  in  the  eyes  of  normal  Evangelicals 
whether  he  had  really  been  converted  at  all.  Indeed,  at  various  times 
of  his  life,  as,  for  instance,  after  the  publication  of  his  Apologia, 
letters,  kindly  intended,  were  addressed  to  him  by  strangers  or 
anonymous  writers,  assuring  him  that  he  did  not  yet  know  what 
conversion  meant,  and  that  the  all-important  change  had  still  to  be 
wrought  in  him  if  he  was  to  be  saved.  .  .  .  He  [Newman]  was  sensible 
that  he  had  ever  been  wanting  in  those  special  Evangelical  ex- 
periences which,  like  the  grip  of  the  hand  or  other  prescribed  signs 
of  a  secret  society,  are  the  sure  token  of  a  member."  ^ 

It  is  interesting  to  note  the  various  steps  by  which 
Newman  at  length  reached  the  position  he  held  at  the 
birth  of  the  Oxford  Movement.  He  tells  us  that  when 
he  was  not  quite  ten  years  old  he  drew,  in  a  "  verse 
book"  in  his  possession,  "the  figure  of  a  solid  cross 
upright,  and  next  to  it  is,  what  may  indeed  be  meant 
for  a  necklace,  but  what  I  cannot  make  out  to  be  any- 
thing else  than    a   set  of  beads  suspended,  with    a   little 

^  Letters  and  Correspondence  of  f.  H.  Newman,  1st  edition,  vol.  i.  pp.  122, 
123. 


14  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

cross  attached."^  Newman  tells  us  that  when  he  was 
fifteen  years  old  he  "  was  very  superstitious,  and  for 
some  time  previous  to  my  conversion  used  constantly 
to  cross  myself  on  going  into  the  dark."  ^  In  1823 
he  began  to  believe  in  the  doctrine  of  Apostolic  Suc- 
cession.^ His  first  sermon  after  his  ordination — which 
event  took  place  on  June  13,  1824 — implied  in  its  tone 
a  denial  of  Baptismal  Regeneration  ;  but  it  was  not  long 
afterwards  when  he  accepted  that  doctrine,  having  been 
persuaded  into  believing  it  from  reading  Archbishop 
Sumner's  Treatise  on  Apostolic  Preaching.  This  book,  he 
asserts,  "  was  successful  beyond  anything  else  in  rooting 
out  Evangelical  doctrines"  from  his  creed.*  In  1824 
his  brother,  F.  W.  Newman,  was  shocked,  while  arranging 
the  furniture  in  some  new  rooms  he  was  about  to  occupy, 
to  find  a  beautiful  engraving  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary 
fixed  up,  and  that  it  was  a  present  from  his  brother,  John 
Henry.*  About  a  year  later  Dr.  Hawkins  taught  him  to 
believe  in  the  doctrine  of  Tradition,  and  that  ''  the  sacred 
text  [of  the  Bible]  was  never  intended  to  teach  doctrine, 
but  only  to  prove  it,  and  that  if  we  would  learn  doctrine 
we  must  have  recourse  to  the  formularies  of  the  Church."  ^ 
In  1832  Newman  had  gone  so  far  wrong  on  this  gravely 
important  subject  as  to  write  to  Dr.  Pusey :  "  As  to 
Scripture  being  practically  sufficient  for  making  the 
Christian,  it  seems  to  me  a  mere  dream."  ^ 

As  early  as  his  fifteenth  year  Newman  "  became  most 
firmly  convinced  that  the  Pope  was  the  Antichrist  pre- 
dicted by  Daniel,  St.  Paul,  and  St.  John,"  and  he  states 
that  his  "  imagination  was  stained  by  the  effects  of  this 
doctrine  up  to  the  year  1843  ;  it  had  been  obliterated 
from  my  reason  and  judgment  at  an  earlier  date."  ^  It  is, 
indeed,  marvellous  how  any  one  who  ever  held  such 
views  as  to  the  Pope  could  go  over  to  Rome.  With  this 
view  of  Antichrist  Newman  also  believed  that  Rome  was 

^  Apologia  Pro  Vita  Sua,  p.  57.  ^  Ibid.  p.  56.  '  Ibid.  p.  67. 

*  Newman's  Lftters  and  Correspondence,  vol.  i.  p.  120. 

^  The  Early  History  of  Cardinal  Newman.     By  his  Brother,  F.  W.  Newman, 
p.  18. 

®  Apologia,  p.  66.        ^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  i.  p.  233.         ^  Apologia,  p.  63. 


ROME    AND    BABYLON  1 5 

the  Babylon  of  the  Revelation  ;  but  while  at  Naples,  early 
in  1833,  he  adopted  the  view  held  by  many  Roman 
Catholic  writers,  and  in  substance  sanctioned  in  the 
notes  to  the  Rheims  New  Testament,  that  Babylon  was 
the  city  of  Rome,  but  not  the  Church  of  Rome.  He 
communicated  his  views  on  this  question  to  his  friend, 
the  Rev.  S.  Rickards  : — 

"A  notion  has  struck  me,"  he  wrote,  "on  reading  the  Revelation 
again  and  again,  that  the  Rome  there  mentioned  is  Rome  considered 
as  a  city  or  2i  place,  without  any  reference  to  the  question  whether  it 
be  Christian  or  Pagan.  As  a  seat  of  government,  it  was  the  first 
cruel  persecutor  of  the  Church,  and  as  such  condemned  to  suffer 
God's  judgments,  which  had  not  yet  been  fully  poured  out  upon  it, 
from  the  plain  fact  that  it  still  exists.  Babylon  is  gone.  Rome  is  a 
city  still,  and  judgments  await  her  therefore."  ^ 

By  adopting  this  theory,  one  of  the  greatest  barriers 
against  reunion  with  the  Church  of  Rome  is  removed 
in  the  mind  of  any  one  who  accepts  it.  The  command 
of  God,  as  to  Babylon  the  Great,  is  "  Come  out  of  her, 
my  people,  that  ye  be  not  partakers  of  her  sins,  and  that 
ye  receive  not  of  her  plagues."  ^  If  the  Church  of  Rome 
be  identical  with  Babylon,  this  divine  command,  "  Come 
out  of  her,"  settles  the  whole  question  as  to  union  with 
her,  either  on  the  part  of  individuals  or  Churches.  And 
that  she  is  Babylon  has  been  most  ably  and  learnedly 
proved  by  the  late  Bishop  Christopher  Wordsworth,  of 
Lincoln  (an  old-fashioned  High  Churchman),  in  his  little 
book,  entitled  Union  with  Rome,  which  has  never  yet  been 
refuted. 

Sometime  before  1828,  when  Dr.  Copleston  resigned 
the  office  of  Provost  of  Oriel  College,  Oxford,  Mr.  New- 
man's conduct  seems  to  have  alarmed  one,  at  least,  of  his 
intimate  friends.     His  brother  writes  : — 

"The  Provost  of  Oriel  (Dr.,  afterwards  Bishop,  Copleston), 
admired  him  [Blanco  White],  and  invited  him  to  join  the  Fellows' 

^  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  i.  p.  388. 
^  Rev.  xviii.  4. 


1 6  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

table ;  but  breakfast  and  tea  he  shared  with  us.  He  and  my  brother 
[John  Henry  Newman],  enjoyed  the  viohn  together.  I  gradually 
heard  their  theological  talk,  which  was  apt  to  end  by  Blanco's  sharp 
warning  :  *  Ah  !  Newman  !  if  you  follow  that  clue  it  will  draw  you 
into  Catholic  error.'  But  I  believe  he  meant  into  self-flagellation, 
maceration  of  the  body."  ^ 

Mr.  Blanco  White  was  a  converted  Roman  Catholic 
priest  of  great  learning,  and,  no  doubt,  he  could  see  more 
clearly  than  others  around  him  in  what  direction  Newman 
was  at  that  time  moving.  On  this  occasion  White  was  a 
true  prophet.  In  1829  Newman  sent  his  mother  and 
sisters  two  sermons  which  he  had  published.  In  ac- 
knowledging their  receipt  his  sister  remarked  :  "  We  have 
long  since  read  your  two  sermons  ;  they  are  very  High 
Church."^  By  the  year  1831  Newman  appears  to 
have  become  dissatisfied  with  the  present  Book  of 
Common  Prayer,  and  wished  to  restore  one  which  had 
in  it  a  considerable  amount  of  Romanism.  "  You  may 
assure  Rickards  from  me,"  he  wrote  to  his  sister,  on  Oct. 
16,  1 831,  "that  I  am  a  reformer  as  much  as  he  can  be.  I 
should  like  (as  far  as  I  can  understand  the  matter),  to  substi- 
tute the  First  Prayer  Book  of  King  Edward  for  the  present 
one."  3  His  ideas  at  that  time  of  what  a  reformer  should 
accomplish  were  set  forth  very  clearly  in  his  Apologia 
Pro  Vita  Sua: — 

"I  saw,"  wrote  Newman,  "that  Reformation  principles  were 
powerless  to  rescue  her  [the  Church  of  England].  As  to  leaving 
her,  the  thought  never  crossed  my  imagination ;  still,  I  ever  kept 
before  me  that  there  was  something  greater  than  the  Estabhshed 
Church,  and  that  was  the  Church  Catholic  and  Apostolic,  set  up 
from  the  beginning,  of  which  she  was  but  the  local  presence  and 
organ.  She  was  nothing,  unless  she  was  this.  She  must  be  dealt 
with  strongly,  or  she  would  be  lost.  There  was  need  of  a  second 
Reformation."  * 

Writing  from  Rome,  March  19,  1833,  Newman  told 
Dr.  Pusey  what  he  even  then  thought  of  the  Protestant 

^  Early  History  of  Cardinal  Newman,  p.  13. 

^  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  i.  p.  215.  ^  Ibid.  vol.  i.  p.  250. 

*  Apologia,  p.  95. 


A    SECOND    REFORMATION  1 7 

Reformation.  "  I  wish,"  he  wrote,  "  I  could  make  up 
my  mind  whether  the  1260  years  of  Captivity  begin 
with  Constantine — it  seems  a  remarkable  coincidence  that 
its  termination  should  fall  about  on  the  Reformation — 
(I  speak  from  memory) — which,  amid  good,  has  been  the 
source  of  all  the  infidelity,  the  second  woe,  which  is  now 
overspreading  the  earth."  ^ 

At  about  the  same  time  Newman  defined  more  clearly 
what  he  then  meant  by  '*  a  second  Reformation."  "  It 
would  be,"  he  said,  "  in  fact  a  second  Reformation  :  a  better 
Reformation,  for  it  would  be  a  return,  not  to  the  sixteenth 
century,  but  to  the  seventeenth."  "  Unfortunately,  as  we 
shall  see  later  on,  Newman's  "  second  Reformation " 
developed  into  a  return,  not  merely  to  the  seventeenth 
century,  but  to  a  period  anterior  to  the  sixteenth  century 
Reformation. 

1  Life  of  Dr.  Piisey,  vol.  i.  p.  249. 
*  Newman's  Apologia,  p.  113. 


B 


CHAPTER   II 

The  Birth  of  the  Oxford  Movement — Newman  and  Froude's  Interview 
with  Wiseman  at  Rome — Its  deep  impression  on  Wiseman's  mind — 
His  bright  expectations  from  it — Was  the  Tractarian  Movement 
bom  in  Oxford  or  Rome  ? — Keble's  sennon  on  National  Apostasy — 
He  denounces  the  State  and  exahs  the  Church — Archbishop  Sumner 
on  Foreign  Protestant  Non-Episcopal  Pastors — The  Tractarians  on 
Church  and  State — Generally  favourable  to  entire  separation — Dr. 
Arnold's  Principles  of  Church  Reform — Its  good  and  objectionable 
features- — Newman  wants  to  "  make  a  row  in  the  world  " — The  Con- 
ference at  Hadleigh — The  Association  of  Friends  of  the  Church — Its 
plans  of  work  —  Efforts  to  win  Evangelical  Churchmen  —  "  The 
seeds  of  revolution  planted  " — They  wished  to  bring  back  the  prin- 
ciples of  Laud — Clerical  and  Lay  addresses  to  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury — The  Tracts  for  the  Times — Their  Romeward  tendency 
— Newman  called  a  "  Papist " — Names  of  the  writers  of  the  Tracts 
for  the  Times — Dr.  Pusey  joins  the  Movement — Fasting — Roman 
Catholic  opinion  of  the  Tracts — Exalting  the  priesthood — Dr. 
Arnold's  faithful  warning. 

On  Tuesday,  July  9,  1833,  Mr.  Newman  returned  to 
Oxford  from  a  prolonged  visit  to  Italy.  The  Rev.  R.  H. 
Froude,  who  had  been  his  companion  during  a  portion 
of  his  journey,  had  returned  some  time  before.  "  The 
following  Sunday,"  writes  Mr.  Newman,  "July  14th,  Mr. 
Keble  preached  the  Assize  sermon  in  the  University 
pulpit.  It  was  published  under  the  title  of  National 
Apostasy.  I  have  ever  considered  and  kept  the  day  as 
the  start  of  the  religious  movement  of  1833."^  During 
their  travels  in  Italy,  Newman  and  Froude  had  two  inter- 
views with  Monsignor  Wiseman  at  Rome,  to  which  the 
latter  gentleman  ever  afterwards  attached  the  highest 
importance,  and  apparently  considered  as  the  real  birth 
date  of  the  Oxford  Movement.  I  have  already,  in  the 
ninth  chapter  of  my  Secret  History  of  the  Oxford  Movement, 
referred  to  this  interview,  which  seems  to  have  been  kept 

^  Newman's  Apologia,  p.  loo. 
18 


A    SECRET    INTERVIEW    AT    ROME  1 9 

from  the  knowledge  of  the  other  leaders  of  the  Tractarian 
Movement  for  some  years  after.  These  two  gentlemen 
discussed  with  the  Monsignor  the  conditions  upon  which 
they  could  be  taken  into  the  Church  of  Rome,  and, 
according  to  the  testimony  of  one  of  their  friends,  the 
Rev.  William  Palmer,  they  seem  to  have  thought  it 
possible  to  obtain  from  the  Papal  authorities  "  some  dis- 
pensation "  which  "  would  enable  them  to  communicate 
with  Rome  without  violation  of  conscience  " — apparently 
thinking  that  they  could  thus  "  communicate  with  Rome  " 
while  remaining  as  clergymen  of  the  Church  of  England. 
The  impression  produced  on  the  mind  of  Wiseman  by 
these  visits  was  deep  and  lasting.  He  evidently  was  led 
to  understand  that  a  Movement  towards  Corporate  Re- 
union was  about  to  be  started  at  Oxford,  by  men  whom 
he  considered  as  of  a  "  truly  Catholic  turn  of  mind  ; " 
and  so  much  impressed  was  he  by  the  interviews  that  he 
determined  to  abandon  his  favourite  studies  and  devote 
himself  to  "  the  new  era  "  which  would  soon  dawn  upon 
England.  Cardinal  Wiseman's  Roman  Catholic  bio- 
grapher relates  of  one  of  these  meetings  at  Rome  : — 

"The  interview  left  Wiseman  with  two  vivid  impressions — sparks 
which  the  course  of  the  Oxford  Movement  fanned  later  into  a  flame. 
He  was  struck  by  the  truly  Catholic  temper  of  mind  of  the  two  men, 
and  by  their  utter  sincerity.  Both  these  impressions  were  contrary 
to  the  views  current  among  his  co-religionists  alike  in  Rome 
andj  in  England,  who  thought  that  Catholic  sympathies  in  the 
Anglican  Church  were,  for  the  most  part,  purely  superficial  and 
aesthetic.  Where  they  were  deeper,  adherence  to  the  Church  of 
England — then  beyond  question  predominantly  Protestant  in  its 
religious  tone — was  supposed  to  be  incompatible  with  sincerity. 
Wiseman  judged  differently  from  this  brief  visit,  and,  with  character- 
istic hopefulness,  made  up  his  mind  that  if  these  men  represented 
the  rising  generation  at  Oxford,  the  centre  of  English  religious  life, 
great  changes  were  in  store  for  the  country.  The  existence  of  such 
opinions  in  Oxford  itself  was  not,  indeed,  a  justification  of  Father 
Spencer's  chimerical  hopes.  But  it  promised  no  longer  the  acces- 
sion of  units  only  in  a  people  of  millions.  A  movement  which  was 
in  its  degree  corporate  was  apparently  beginning  among  leading 
minds  within  the  Anglican  Church.     Such  a  movement  must  have 


2  0  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

peculiar  elements  of  power,  resulting  from  its  claim  to  be  national 
as  well  as  Catholic.  It  appealed  to  English  Churchmen  as  the 
work  of  their  friends,  while  the  hereditary  supporters  of  the  Roman 
See  necessarily  appeared  in  a  measure  to  assail  them  as  foes.  From 
this  year  dates  the  rise  of  a  new  hopefulness  in  Wiseman.  '  From 
the  day  of  Newman  and  Froude's  visit  to  me,'  he  wrote  in  1847, 
*  never  for  an  instant  did  I  waver  in  my  conviction  that  a  new  era 
had  commenced  in  England  ...  to  this  grand  object  I  devoted 
myself  ...  the  favourite  studies  of  former  years  were  abandoned 
for  the  pursuit  of  this  aim  alone.'  "  ^ 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Wiseman's  biographer 
accurately  describes  his  attitude  towards  the  Oxford 
Movement  from  the  moment  that  he  had  the  interview 
with  Newman  and  Froude  in  Rome,  three  months  before 
the  avowed  birth  of  the  Movement.  The  biographer's 
statements  are  confirmed  by  the  writings  of  Wiseman 
himself.  In  the  preface  to  the  second  volume  of  his 
Essays,  Wiseman  writes  : — 

"  I  have  already  alluded,  in  the  preface  to  the  first  volume,  as 
well  as  in  the  body  of  this,  to  the  first  circumstance  which  turned  my 
attention  to  the  wonderful  movement  then  commenced  in  England 

the  visit  which  is  recorded  in  Froude's  Remains.     From  that 

MOMENT  //  took  the  uppermost  place  in  my  thoughts^  and  became  the 
object  of  their  intensest  interest."  ^ 

In  a  footnote  to  the  reprint  of  his  review  of  Froude's 
Remains,  and  written  fourteen  years  after  its  appearance 
in  the  Dublin  Review,  Wiseman  remarks : — 

"  In  p.   307  of  the  Remains,  will  be  found  an  account  of  what 
remains  marked,  with  gratitude  in  my  mind,  as  an  epoch  in  my  life 

the  visit  which  Mr.  Froude  unexpectedly  paid  me,  in  company 

with  one  [Newman]  who  never  afterwards  departed  from  my 
thoughts,  and  whose  eloquent  pleadings  for  the  faith  have  endeared 
him  to  every  Catholic  heart.  For  many  years  it  had  been  a  promise 
of  my  affection  to  St.  Philip,  that  I  would  endeavour,  should  oppor- 
tunity be  afforded  me,  to  introduce  his  beautiful  Institute  into 
England.  But  little  could  I  foresee,  that  when  I  received  that  most 
welcome  visit,  I  was  in  company  with  its  future  founder.    From  that 


1  Life  and  Times  of  Cardinal  Wiseman.    By  Wilfrid  Ward,  vol  i.  pp.  1 18,  119. 
^  Wiseman's  Essays  on  Various  Subjects,  vol.  ii.  p.  vi. 


WISEMAN    EXPECTS    GREAT    THINGS  21 

HOUR,  however,  I  watched  with  intense  interest  a7id  love  tlie  Move- 
ment of  which  I  THEN  caught  the  first  ghmpse.  My  studies  changed 
iheir  course,  the  bent  of  my  mind  was  altered,  in  the  strong  desire 
to  co-operate  with  the  new  mercies  of  Providence."  ^ 

We  may  here  well  ask,  in  amazement,  What  could 
Newman  and  Froude  have  told  Monsignor  Wiseman,  at 
this  secret  interview,  which  led  him  to  alter  greatly 
the  course  of  his  life,  to  form  apparently  extravagant 
hopes  for  the  future,  and  such  blessings  for  the 
Church  of  Rome,  as  the  result  of  their  forthcoming 
labours  in  the  Church  of  England  ?  A  really  adequate 
report  of  their  interview  will,  I  fear,  never  be  given  to 
the  public.  But  it  is  evident  that  these  founders  of  the 
Oxford  Movement  consulted  with  this  Roman  prelate  as 
to  their  plans  for  the  future,  and  gave  him  clearly  to 
understand  that  their  work  would  be  on  "  Catholic  "  lines. 
Nothing  less  than  information  of  this  kind  would  ever  have 
led  Wiseman  to  look  upon  their  call  on  him  as  a  "  most 
welcome  visit,"  or  made  him  ever  afterwards  to  think  of 
it  as  "  an  epoch "  in  his  life.  "  From  THAT  HOUR,"  he 
declares,  "  I  watched  with  intense  interest  and  love  the 
Movement  of  which  /  then  caught  the  first  glimpse." 
From  that  memorable  day,  he  assures  us,  he  was  certain 
that  "  a  new  era  had  commenced  in  England,"  and  he 
determined  to  give  up  his  ''  favourite  studies,"  and  instead 
of  following  them  he  gave  "the  uppermost  place  in  his 
thoughts,"  and  his  most  zealous  labours  to  help  on  "  with 
intense  interest  and  love  the  Movement "  of  w^hich  he 
"  theft  caught  the  first  glimpse,"  revealed  to  him,  there  can 
be  no  reasonable  doubt,  by  Newman  and  Froude.  These 
founders  of  the  Romeward  Movement  do  not  appear  to 
have,  at  first,  consulted  the  Archbishops  of  the  Church  of 
England.  They  thought,  no  doubt,  that  their  schemes 
would  have  a  better  chance  of  success  if  they  first  con- 
sulted a  prelate  of  that  Church  which  has  ever  been  the 
bitterest  enemy  of  the  Church  of  England.  No  doubt, 
from  their  own  standpoint,  they  acted  wisely.  But  their 
most  shameful  conduct  naturally  suggests  the  important 

^  Wiseman's  Essays  on  Various  Stibjects,  vol.  ii.  pp.  94,  95,  noie. 


2  2  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

question,    Was    the    Oxford     Movement    really    born    in 
Oxford,  or  had  it  its  birth  in  Rome  ? 

Keble's  sermon  on  National  Apostasy,  with  which 
Newman  considered  that  the  Tractarian  campaign  com- 
menced, was  in  reality  a  denunciation  of  the  State,  and 
an  exaltation  of  the  Church.  He  mourned  over  the 
"  impatience  under  pastoral  control,"  which  he  considered 
was  one  of  the  characteristics  of  the  day,  and  "  a  never- 
failing  symptom  of  an  unchristian  temper."  ^  He  was 
particularly  indignant  at  any  want  of  respect  shown  to 
the  "  Successors  of  the  Apostles,"  meaning,  of  course,  the 
Episcopally  ordained  clergy  only.  "  Disrespect  to  the 
Successors  of  the  Apostles,  as  such,"  he  exclaimed,  "is  an 
unquestionable  symptom  of  enmity  to  Him,  who  gave 
them  their  commission  at  first,  and  has  pledged  Himself 
to  be  with  them  for  ever.  Suppose  such  disrespect  general 
and  national  .  .  .  that  nation,  how  highly  soever  she  may 
think  of  her  own  religion  and  morality,  stands  convicted 
in  His  sight  of  a  direct  disavowal  of  His  sovereignty."^ 
And  all  this  respect  he  claimed  for  the  clergy,  quite  apart 
from  their  personal  character.  Apparently,  no  one,  in 
the  opinion  of  Mr.  Keble,  should  show  any  "  disrespect " 
to  a  "  Successor  of  the  Apostles,"  no  matter  what  his 
character  might  be.  On  this  occasion  Mr.  Keble  took  the 
gloomiest  view  of  the  condition  of  the  country,  affirming 
that  it  "  is  fast  becoming  hostile  to  the  Church,  and 
cannot  therefore  long  be  the  friend  of  God "  ^  —  an 
assertion  which  implies  that  no  Dissenter,  who  is  hostile 
to  the  Church  of  England,  can  be  "  the  friend  of  God." 
He  defined  the  "Church,"  in  this  sermon,  as  "the  laity,  as 
well  as  the  clergy  in  their  three  orders — the  whole  body 
of  Christians  united,  according  to  the  will  of  Jesus  Christ, 
under  the  Successors  of  the  Apostles."  *  From  this  it 
manifestly  follows  that  the  "  zvhole  body  of  Christians " 
are  united  only  under  those  "  Successors  of  the  Apostles  " 
who  are  divided  into  ^^ three  orders;"  and  therefore  no  non- 

^  National  Apostasy   Considered.      By  John   Keble,  M.A.,  p.  l8.      Oxford: 
Parker.     1833. 

2  Ibid.  p.  18.  3  /^,v_  p.  20.  •»  Ibid.  p.  21. 


NON-EPISCOPAL    CHURCHES  23 

Episcopalian  body  can  possibly  be  any  part  of  the  visible 
Church  of  God  at  all.  This  sermon  stamps  the  Tractarian 
Movement  from  its  commencement  as  narrow-minded 
and  bigoted,  and  void  of  true  Catholicity.  The  whole 
sermon  was  a  glorification  of  the  clerical  order  at  the 
expense  of  the  State. 

It  is  refreshing  to  turn  from  such  assertions  as  those 
of  Keble  to  the  broad-minded  and  Christian  charity  of 
Dr.  J.  B.  Sumner,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  who,  re- 
plying to  the  Brighton  Protestant  Defence  Committee,  on 
October  13,  1851,  said: — 

"It  would  as  little  represent  my  sentiments,  as  it  would  ill 
become  my  station,  if  I  should  be  suspected  of  undervaluing  the 
perfect  constitution  of  the  Church  of  England.  It  is  our  great 
privilege  to  enjoy  apostolical  discipline,  together  with  apostolical 
doctrine.  But  we  do  not  disparage  these  advantages  when  we 
acknowledge  our  conviction  that  foreign  Protestants  who  teach 
apostolical  doctrine  though  not  under  apostolical  discipline,  may 
yet  be  owned  of  God  as  faithful  Ministers  of  His  Word  and  Sacra- 
ments, and  enjoy  His  blessing  on  their  labours."^ 

And  there  was  surely  much  wisdom  in  what  the  late 
Duke  of  Argyll  (a  Presbyterian)  said  at  a  meeting  in 
London  in  May  1851: — "Remember  too,"  he  said,  "that 
in  after  times,  when  influences  come  to  operate  upon  the 
character  of  the  English  Church,  similar  to  those  which 
you  are  dreading  now,  in  the  latter  end  of  the  reign  of 
Elizabeth,  and  of  the  succeeding  Stuarts,  then  was  the 
time  when  there  was  a  withdrawal  of  sympathy  from  the 
other  non-episcopal  communions.  You  will  find  as  an 
historical  fact  that  the  feeling  of  sympathy  with  other 
Protestant  communions,  non-episcopal,  was  coincident 
with  the  best  and  most  Protestant  times  of  the  Church 
of  England,  whilst  the  withdrawal  of  that  sympathy  was 
coincident  with  times  when  Romish  tendencies  and  Romish 
influences  began  to  invade  that  Church."  ^ 

It  seems  to  have  been  forgotten  in  the  present  day, 
that  many  of   the  leaders  of  the  Tractarian  party  were 


^  Guardian,  October  29,  1 851,  p.  761. 
^  Guardian,  May  14,  185 1,  p.  348. 


24  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

from  its  very  birth  favourable  to  the  entire  separation  of 
the  Church  of  England  from  State  control.  Mr.  F.  W. 
Newman  tells  us  that,  on  one  occasion,  when  he  visited  his 
brother,  Dr.  Newman,  at  Birmingham,  soon  after  the 
Colenso  Case  was  ended,  the  future  Cardinal  said  to 
him  : — 

"'When  in  1833  we  met  to  start  the  Tracts  for  the  Ttfnes,  we 
thought  it  only  prudent  to  be  frank  to  one  another,  and  we  all 
submitted  to  free  questioning  on  every  important  subject :  among 
them,  the  Union  of  Church  and  State.  To  our  astonishment  we 
found  that,  one  and  all,  we  desired  entire  separation.  The  book 
on  Scotch  Episcopalianism  (ascribed  to  Archbishop  Whately)  had 
converted  us.'  '  Is  this  a  secret  ? '  asked  I.  '  Not  at  all,'  was  his 
reply,  '  tell  it  as  widely  as  you  choose.' "  ^ 

I  do  not  wonder  that  Mr.  F.  W.  Newman  adds,  in 
relating  this  anecdote  : — "  I  am  amused  to  find,  that  while 
the  clergy  were  looking  to  the  Puseyites  as  their  defence 
against  the  formidable  Dissenters,  those  very  Puseyites 
were  on  the  side  of  the  foe."  In  his  Apologia,  Newman 
admits  that  Whately  fixed  in  his  mind  "those  anti-Eras- 
tian  views  of  Church  polity  which  were  one  of  the  most 
prominent  features  of  the  Tractarian  Movement,"  and  that 
his  work  on  Scotch  Episcopalianism  "  had  a  gradual  but 
a  deep  effect"  upon  his  mind.^  And  yet,  on  August  14, 
1833,  Mr.  R.  H.  Froude  was  able  to  announce  that  New- 
man had  agreed  to  a  declaration  containing  the  following 
clauses  : — "  IV.  We  protest  against  all  efforts  directed 
to  the  subversion  of  existing  institutions,  or  to  the  separa- 
tion of  Church  and  State  ;  V.  We  think  it  a  duty  steadily 
to  contemplate  and  provide  for  the  contingency  of  such 
a  separation."  Mr.  Froude  added  : — "  Keble  demurs  to 
these,  because  he  thinks  the  union  of  Church  and  State,  as 
it  is  now  understood,  actually  sinful."  ^  The  Rev.  William 
Palmer,  of  Worcester  College,  Oxford,  who  was  for  several 
years   a   leader   of   the   Tractarian    party   until    its   rapid 

^  TTie  Early  History  of  Cardinal  Newman,  p.  37. 
^  Apologia,  pp.  69,  71. 

'  A  Collection  of  Papers  Connected  with  the  Theological  AIove»ient  of  1833. 
By  the  Hon.  and  Rev.  A.  P.  Percival,  2nd  edition,  p.  12. 


SEPARATION    OF    CHURCH    AND    STATE  25 

progress  towards  Romanism  alarmed  him,  states  that  at 
the  commencement  of  the  movement  "  there  was  some 
difference  of  opinion  on  the  question  of  the  union  of 
Church  and  State,  which  some  of  our  friends  seemed 
inclined  to  regard  as  an  evil  ;  while  I  (and  perhaps 
another),  was  desirous  to  maintain  this  union."  ^  This 
statement  shows  that  only  one  or  perhaps  two  of  the 
party  were  in  favour  of  the  union  of  Church  and  State. 
Mr.  Froude  himself  seems  to  have  anticipated  a  separation, 
and  to  have  looked  forward  to  it  with  hope.  Writing 
from  Rome,  March  16,  1833,  he  remarks: — "To  be 
sure  it  would  be  a  great  thing  to  have  a  true  Church  in 
Germany  ;  in  Scotland  it  seems  to  be  thriving,  and  if  the 
State  will  but  kick  us  off  we  may  yet  do  in  England."  ^ 
In  the  following  August  Froude  wrote  to  another  friend 
mentioning  that  a  sermon  which  he  had  written  had 
met  with  strong  approbation  from  an  unnamed  gentle- 
man, and  adding  : — 

"  My  subject  is  the  duty  of  contemplating  the  contingency  of  a 
separation  between  Church  and  State,  and  of  providing  against  it, 
i.e.  by  studying  the  principles  of  ecclesiastical  subordination,  so 
that  when  the  law  of  the  land  ceases  to  enforce  this,  we  may  have  a 
law  within  ourselves  to  supply  its  place."  ^ 

Although,  as  we  have  seen,  early  in  August,  Newman 
had  agreed  to  a  protest  against  efforts  being  put  forth  for 
"the  separation  of  Church  and  State,"  yet,  on  the  31st 
of  the  same  month,  he  wrote  a  letter  to  an  intimate  friend, 
Mr.  J.  W.  Bowden,  in  which,  by  contrast,  his  double- 
dealing  is  clearly  revealed  : — 

"  Not,"  wrote  Newman,  "  that  I  would  advocate  a  separation  of 
Church  and  State  unless  the  nation  does  more  tyrannical  things 
against  us ;  but  I  do  feel  I  should  be  glad  if  it  were  done  and  over, 
much  as  the  nation  would  lose  by  it,  for  I  fear  the  Church  is  being 
corrupted  by  the  union."  * 


^  N'arrative  of  Events  Connected  with  the  Tracts  for  the  Times.     By  William 
Palmer,  edition  1883,  p.  103. 

^  Froude's  Remains,  vol.  i.  p.  302. 

3  Ibid.  p.  323. 

*  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  i.  p,  449. 


2  6  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

What  the  Tractarian  party,  as  a  whole,  seemed  to 
desire  in  the  relations  of  Church  and  State  was,  perhaps, 
accurately  expressed  in  No.  59  of  the  Tracts  foT-  the  Timesy 
dated  April  25,  1835,  and  written  by  Mr.  R.  H.  Froude. 
It  pleads  for  ''  State  Protection "  for  the  Church,  and 
protests  against  "  State  Interference "  with  its  concerns. 
The  early  Tractarians  were  alarmed  at  what  seemed  to 
them  the  increasing  encroachments  of  the  State  on  the 
province  of  the  Church.  They  believed  that  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  day  were  in  favour  of  a  Revision  of  the 
Liturgy  with  a  view  to  a  comprehension  of  Dissenters 
within  the  pale  of  the  Established  Church  ;  and  they  were 
certainly  made  extremely  angry  by  the  publication  of  Dr. 
Arnold's  pamphlet  on  Principles  of  Church  Reform^  which 
was  issued  from  the  press  early  in  1833,  and  obtained  a 
very  large  circulation.^  It  created  a  great  sensation  by  its 
daring  proposal  to  "  extinguish  Dissent  "  "  by  comprehen- 
sion." Apart  from  the  main  object  of  the  pamphlet,  it 
contained  several  expressions  which  must  have  been  pecu- 
liarly distasteful  to  the  rising  party  of  Sacerdotalists.  In 
it  Dr.  Arnold  declared  that  Christianity  "  has  provided 
in  the  strongest  manner  against  superstition  and  priest- 
craft "  ;  ^  and  he  expressed  himself  as  "  ashamed  "  of  "  the 
petty  tyranny  of  Laud  "  ;  ^  affirming  that  "  the  mischievous 
confusion  of  the  Christian  ministry  with  a  priesthood,  that 
anything  can  be  lawful  for  a  Christian  layman  which  is 
unlawful  for  a  Christian  minister,"  was  "  a  most  ground- 
less superstition."  * 

"  I  may  be  allowed  to  express  an  earnest  hope,"  wrote  Dr. 
Arnold,  "that  if  ever  an  union  with  Dissenters  be  attempted,  and 
it  should  thus  become  necessary  to  alter  our  present  terms  of  com- 
munion, the  determining  on  the  alterations  to  be  made  should  never 
be  committed  to  a  Convocation,  or  to  any  commission  consisting  of 
clergymen  alone.  .  .  .  Laymen  have  no  right  to  shift  from  their  own 
shoulders  an  important  part  of  Christian  responsibility ;  and  as  no 
educated  layman  individually  is  justified  in  taking  his  own  faith  upon 

1  Principles  of  Chunk  Reform.     By  Thomas  Arnold,  D.D.,  Head  Master  of 
Rugby  School.     London  :  B,  Fellowes.     1833. 

'^  Ibid,  2nd  edition,  p.  II.  ^  Ibid.  p.  20.  *  Ibid.  p.  62. 


DR.    ARNOLD    ON    CHURCH    REFORM  27 

trust  from  a  clergyman,  so  neither  are  the  laity,  as  a  body,  warranted 
in  taking  the  national  faith  in  the  same  way.  If  ever  it  should  be 
thought  right  to  appoint  commissioners  to  revise  the  Articles,  it  is  of 
paramount  importance,  in  order  to  save  the  plan  from  utter  failure, 
that  a  sufficient  number  of  laymen,  distinguished  for  their  piety  and 
enlarged  views,  should  be  added  to  the  ecclesiastical  members  of 
the  commission."  ^ 

I  do  not  wonder  that  such  assertions,  and  such  pro- 
posals, made  the  Tractarians  furious  with  Dr.  Arnold.  It 
must  be  admitted  that  there  were  vahd  objections  against 
certain  portions  of  his  scheme  of  Church  Reform.  What 
he  really  aimed  at  was  to  turn  the  Church  of  England 
into  a  kind  of  ecclesiastical  Noah's  Ark,  in  which  its 
inmates,  however,  would  remain  untamed.  A  plan  for 
including  the  orthodox  Nonconformists  only  in  the  Estab- 
Hshment  would  no  doubt  have  secured  the  support  of 
many  members  of  the  Church  of  England.  In  the  reign 
of  William  III.  a  scheme  of  comprehension  was  drawn  up 
by  a  Royal  Commission,  consisting  of  the  Archbishop  of 
York,  the  Bishops  of  London,  Winchester,  St.  Asaph, 
Rochester,  Carlisle,  Exeter,  Salisbury,  Bangor,  and  Chester, 
and  a  large  number  of  lesser  Dignitaries  and  Divines ; 
but  unfortunately  it  was  eventually  defeated.  Dr.  Arnold's 
scheme  was  far  more  Latitudinarian  than  that  which  was 
proposed  in  the  reign  of  William  III.  ;  for  it  aimed  at 
including  Unitarians  and  Romanists  also  ;  and  treated 
Christian  doctrine  as  a  matter  of  little  or  no  importance. 

"  Might  it  not  be  possible,"  asked  Dr.  Arnold,  "  to  constitute  a 
Church  thoroughly  national,  thoroughly  united,  thoroughly  Christian, 
which  should  allow  great  varieties  of  opinion,  and  of  ceremonies, 
and  forms  of  worship,  according  to  the  various  knowledge,  and 
habits,  and  tempers  of  its  members,  while  it  truly  held  one  common 
faith,  and  trusted  in  one  common  Saviour,  and  worshipped  one 
common  God  ?  "  - 

As  to  Quakers,  Roman  Catholics,  and  Unitarians,  Dr. 
Arnold  admitted  that  their  "differences  appear  to  offer 
greater    difficulty  "    than    those    amongst    ordinary    Dis- 

^  Arnold's  Principles  of  Church  Reform,  pp.  80,  81. 
2  Ibid.  p.  28. 


2  8  HISTORY    OP^    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

senters  ;  and  that  so  long  as  these  three  particular  sects 
"  preserve  exactly  their  present  character,  it  would  seem 
impracticable  to  comprehend  them  ii":  any  national  Christian 
Church."  But,  nevertheless,  he  was  full  of  hope  that 
these  difficulties  would  be  removed.  "  Is  it,"  he  asked, 
"  beyond  hope,  that  many  who  are  now  Roman  Catholics, 
would  ere  long  unite  themselves  religiously  as  well  as 
politically  with  the  rest  of  their  countrymen  ?  Lastly, 
with  regard  to  the  Unitarians,  it  seems  to  me  that  in 
their  case  an  alteration  of  our  present  terms  of  com- 
munion would  be  especially  useful,"  provided  they  (the 
Unitarians)  would,  as  to  our  Saviour,  "  call  him  Lord  and 
God."  ^  In  a  comprehensive  Church  of  this  kind.  Dr. 
Arnold,  however,  insisted  on  the  necessity  of  an  Episcopal 
form  of  government,  though  not  as  a  matter  of  divine  right. 
"  It  will  be  observed,"  he  wrote,  "that  the  whole  of  this 
scheme  supposes  an  Episcopal  government,  and  requires 
that  all  ministers  should  receive  Episcopal  ordination."  ^ 

Dr.  Arnold's  scheme  of  Church  Reform  was  attacked 
from  all  quarters.  His  biographer.  Dean  Stanley,  states 
that :  "  Dissenters  objected  to  its  attacks  upon  what  he 
considered  their  sectarian  narrowness  ;  the  clergy  of  the 
Establishment  to  its  supposed  Latitudinarianism  ;  its  advo- 
cacy of  large  reforms  repelled  the  sympathy  of  many 
Conservatives  ;  its  advocacy  of  the  importance  of  religious 
institutions  repelled  the  sympathy  of  many  Liberals."  ^  It 
is  remarkable  that,  notwithstanding  so  much  violent  opposi- 
tion from  so  many  quarters,  nearly  all  the  plans  of  Church 
Reform  laid  down  in  Dr.  Arnold's  pamphlet,  excepting  that 
for  Church  comprehension,  have  since  been  adopted,  many 
of  them  with  the  hearty  approbation  of  the  Ritualists. 
He  pleaded  for  an  increased  number  of  Bishops,  but 
without  seats  in  the  House  of  Lords;  the  "institution  of 
diocesan  general  assemblies "  now  realised  in  Diocesan 
Conferences  ;  for  the  ordination  of  Clergymen  too  poor 
to     pay     for     a     University     education  ;      for     parochial 

^  Arnold's  Principles  of  Church  Reform,  pp.  36,  37. 

2  IHd.  p.  56. 

'  Stanley's  Life  of  Dr.  Arnold.     Ward,  Lock,  &  Co.'s  edition,  p.  190. 


"WE    MUST    MAKE    A    ROW"  2  0 

councils;  the  removal  of  sinecures  and  pluralities  ;  the 
opening  of  our  Universities  to  Dissenters  ;  and  that  ''  the 
people  should  have  a  more  direct  check  than  they  have 
at  present  on  the  nomination  of  their  ministers,"  which 
yet,  unfortunately,  remains  to  be  realised. 

And  so,  nominally  to  oppose  the  Latitudinarian  spirit 
of  the  age,  but  in  reality  to  build  up  a  High  Church 
Movement  opposed  to  Protestantism,  Keble,  Newman, 
Froude,  Percival,  and  their  disciples  banded  themselves 
together  into  a  party.  Meeting  the  Rev.  Isaac  Williams 
one  day  soon  after  their  work  began,  Newman  said  to 
him,  "  Isaac,  we  must  make  a  row  in  the  world  ! "  ^  No 
one  can  now  deny  that  the  Oxford  Movement  has  made 
"  a  row  in  the  world."  It  has  torn  the  Church  of 
England  asunder,  broken  up  its  peace,  and  filled  it  with 
quarrels  and  dissensions.  Those  who  begin  a  "  row " 
are  to  be  held  primarily  responsible  for  it.  How  the 
work  began  is  related  by  the  Rev.  William  Palmer  : — 

"I  had  not,"  he  writes,  "been  very  intimately  acquainted  with 
Mr.  Newman  and  Mr.  Froude,  and  was  scarcely  known  to  Mr. 
Keble  or  Mr,  Percival,  when  our  deep  sense  of  the  wrongs  sus- 
tained by  the  Church  in  the  suppression  of  Bishoprics,  and  our 
feeling  of  the  necessity  of  doing  whatever  was  in  our  power  to 
arrest  the  tide  of  evil,  brought  us  together  in  the  summer  of  1833. 
It  was  at  the  beginning  of  long  vacation  (when,  Mr.  Froude  being 
almost  the  only  occupant  of  Oriel  College,  we  frequently  met  in 
the  common  room)  that  the  resolution  to  unite  and  associate  in 
defence  of  the  Church,  of  her  violated  liberties,  and  neglected 
principles,  arose.  This  resolution  was  immediately  acted  on ;  and 
while  I  corresponded  with  Mr.  Rose,  Mr.  Froude  communicated 
our  design  to  Mr.  Keble.  Mr.  Newman  soon  took  part  in  our 
deliberations,  on  his  return  from  the  Continent.  The  particular 
course  which  we  were  to  adopt  became  the  subject  of  much  and 
anxious  thought;  and  as  it  was  deemed  advisable  to  confer  with 
Mr.  Rose  on  so  important  a  subject,  Mr.  Froude  and  myself,  after 
some  correspondence,  visited  him  at  Hadleigh,  in  July,  where  I 
also  had  the  pleasure  of  becoming  personally  acquainted  with  Mr. 
Percival,  who  had  been  invited  to  take  part  in  our  deliberations. 
The  conference  at  Hadleigh,  which  continued  for  nearly  a  week, 

1  Autobiography  of  Isaac  Williams^  p.  63. 


30  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

concluded  without  any  specific  arrangements  being  entered  into, 
though  we  all  concurred  as  to  the  necessity  of  some  mode  of  com- 
bined action,  and  the  expediency  of  circulating  tracts  or  publica- 
tions on  ecclesiastical  subjects,  intended  to  inculcate  sound  and 
enlightened  principles  of  attachment  to  the  Church.  On  our  return 
to  Oxford,  frequent  conferences  took  place  at  Oriel  College,  between 
Mr.  Froude,  Mr.  Newman,  Mr.  Keble,  and  the  writer,  in  which 
various  plans  were  discussed,  and  in  which  especial  attention  was 
given  to  the  preparation  of  some  formulary  of  agreement  as  a  basis 
for  our  Association."  ^ 

Hadleigh  was,  indeed,  a  strange  place  for  holding 
such  a  conference.  ''The  town  of  Hadleigh,"  says  Foxe, 
"  was  one  of  the  first  that  received  the  Word  of  God  in 
all  England,  at  the  preaching  of  Master  Thomas  Bilney, 
by  whose  industry  the  Gospel  of  Christ  had  such  gracious 
success,  and  took  such  root  there,  that  a  great  number  of 
that  parish  became  exceeding  well  learned  in  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  as  well  women  as  men  .  .  .  that  the  whole 
town  seemed  rather  a  university  of  the  learned,  than  a 
town  of  cloth-making  or  labouring  people  ;  and,  what  most 
is  to  be  commended,  they  were  for  the  most  part  faithful 
followers  of  God's  Word  in  their  living."  ^  At  this  period 
Rowland  Taylor  was  rector  of  Hadleigh,  a  holy  and  godly 
man  in  life  and  doctrine,  and  a  very  decided  Protestant. 
Soon  after  Queen  Mary  came  to  the  throne,  hearing  his 
church  bells  ringing  one  day,  he  went  into  the  building 
to  ascertain  the  cause.  There,  to  his  utter  astonishment, 
he  found  that  his  honest  communion  table  had  been 
changed  for  a  Popish  altar,  and  a  priest  was  actually 
saying  Mass  there  at  the  moment,  surrounded  by  armed 
men.  Thereupon  Dr.  Taylor  said  to  the  priest,  in  the 
forcible  language  common  in  those  days,  "  Thou  devil ! 
Who  made  thee  so  bold  to  enter  into  this  Church  of 
Christ  to  profane  and  defile  it  with  this  abominable 
idolatry  ?  I  command  thee,  thou  Popish  wolf,  in  the 
name  of  God  to  avoid  hence,  and  not  to  presume  here, 
with  such  Popish  idolatry,  to  poison  Christ's  flock."  ^    For 

^  VaXm&r's  Narrative  of  Events,  pp.  loi,  102. 

2  Foxe's  Acts  and  Monuments,  vol.  vi.  p.  676,  edition  1859. 

3  Ibid.  p.  679. 


THE    HADLEIGH    CONFERENCE  3 1 

faithful  conduct  like  this  Dr.  Taylor  was  committed  to 
prison,  and  put  upon  his  trial.  The  principal  charges 
against  him  were  his  denial  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Real 
Presence  and  the  Sacrifice  of  the  Mass,  both  of  which 
doctrines  are  now  commonly  taught  by  the  men  who 
are  the  successors  of  those  who,  by  a  strange  coincidence, 
met  in  Hadleigh  Rectory  in  the  month  of  July  1833. 
And  was  it  not  strange  indeed,  remembering  what  has 
passed  since  then,  that  in  the  course  of  a  special  sermon 
preached  in  Hadleigh  church  during  this  High  Church 
conference,  the  preacher  should  have  said :  "  I  stand 
where  the  Martyr,  Rowland  Taylor,  stood  [/>.  in  the 
self-same  pulpit  from  which  Taylor  preached  the  Pro- 
testant religion].  May  God  in  His  mercy  give  grace 
to  the  clergy  of  this  day  to  follow  his  example,  and,  if 
need  be,  to  testify  for  the  truth,  even  unto  the  death."  ^ 
In  the  very  spot  where  the  Protestant  Reformation  began 
in  that  part  of  the  country,  the  anti-Reformation  Move- 
ment first  erected  its  head.  What  the  nature  of  the 
work  done  at  the  Hadleigh  Conference  was  we  learn 
from  a  statement  of  Mr.  Newman  made  late  in  his  life. 
He  remarks  that : — 

"Bet\ve,en  July  25  and  29  a  meeting  was  held  at  Mr.  Rose's 
Rectory  at  Hadleigh,  at  which  were  present  Mr.  Palmer,  Mr.  Froude, 
Mr.  Percival,  and  Mr.  Rose.  Mr.  Keble  was  to  have  been  there, 
but  there  is  evidence  that  he  was  not.  Mr.  Newman  was  not  there. 
There  appears  to  have  been  some  division  of  opinion  at  the  meeting, 
but  two  points  were  agreed  on  :  to  fight  for  the  doctrine  of  the 
Apostolical  Succession,  and  for  the  integrity  of  the  Prayer  Book. 
And  two  things  followed  from  it — the  plan  of  associating  for  the 
defence  of  the  Church,  and  the  Tracts  for  the  Thnes.  Mr.  Newman 
was  not  at  the  meeting,  but  he  had  already  suggested  the  plan  of 
the  Association  to  Froude  and  Keble,  with  whom  he  was  in  close 
correspondence;  and,  as  soon  as  the  determination  was  taken  to 
move,  he,  with  Mr.  Palmer,  took  the  labouring  oars  in  the  effort 
which  followed."  ^ 

There  was  another  work  undertaken  at  this   Hadleigh 

1  Percival 's  Collection  of  Papers,  p.  43. 
^  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  i.  pp.  431,  432. 


32  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Conference.  It  was  that  of  revising  a  new  Catechism  for 
the  laity,  which  was  subsequently  published  under  the 
title  of  The  Churchman's  Manual.  Mr.  Percival,  in  his 
Collection  of  Papers,  reprints  the  whole  of  this  noteworthy 
document,  in  which  the  chief  feature  is  the  doctrine  of 
Apostolical  Succession.  The  attitude  of  the  new  party 
towards  Dissenters  is  indicated  by  the  following  unchari- 
table statement : — 

"In  what  respect  do  all  the  Protestant  Dissenters  differ  from 
the  Church  ? 

"yi.  Each  sect  has  some  point  of  difference  peculiar  to  itself: 
but  they  all  differ  in  this,  namely,  that  their  teachers  can  produce 
no  commission  from  Christ  to  exercise  the  office  of  Ministers  of  the 
Gospel.     These  have  departed  from  the  Apostles'  fellowship." 

From  the  commencement  of  the  Oxford  Movement  its 
proceedings  were  conducted  with  a  considerable  amount 
of  secrecy.  Ample  evidence  in  proof  of  this  assertion  is 
given  in  the  first  chapter  of  my  Secret  History  of  the  Oxford 
Movement,  to  which  I  must  refer  my  readers,  since  I  am 
anxious,  as  far  as  possible,  to  avoid  travelling  over  the 
same  ground  a  second  time. 

After  the  Hadleigh  Conference  the  friends  of  the  cause 
held  several  private  meetings  at  Oriel  College,  Oxford,  for 
the  purpose  of  maturing  their  plans.  Eventually  it  was 
decided  to  form  "The  Association  of  Friends  of  the 
Church."  The  founders  of  this  Association  pledged  them- 
selves to  inculcate  on  all  committed  to  their  charge  "  the 
inestimable  privilege  of  communion  with  our  Lord  through 
the  successors  of  the  Apostles  "  ;  to  "  provide  and  circulate 
books  and  tracts  which  may  tend  to  familiarise  the  ima- 
ginations of  men  to  the  idea  of  an  Apostolical  Commis- 
sion "  ;  to  revive  "among  Churchmen  the  practice  of 
daily  Common  Prayer,  and  more  frequent  participation 
of  the  Lord's  Supper  "  ;  and  "  to  resist  any  attempt  that 
may  be  made  to  alter  the  Liturgy  on  insufficient  autho- 
rity, i.e.  without  the  exercise  of  the  free  and  deliberate 
judgment  of  the  Church  on  the  alterations  proposed."  It 
will  thus  be  seen  that  the  party  did  not  object  in  itself  to 


''the  friends  of  the  church'*  33 

any  alterations,  or  Revision  of  the  Liturgy,  but  only  to 
such  as  were  made  on  "  insufficient  authority."  ^ 

The  intention  of  the  founders  of  the  new  Society  was 
to  form  an  organisation  which  should  extend  through  the 
whole  of  England.  For  this  purpose  they  issued  a  series 
of  "  Suggestions  for  the  Formation  of  an  Association  of 
Friends  of  the  Church,"  to  be  composed  of  both  clergy 
and  laity.  In  these  Suggestions  they  asserted  that,  "  The 
privilege  possessed  by  parties  hostile  to  her  [the  Church 
of  England]  doctrine,  ritual,  and  polity,  of  legislating  for 
her,  their  avowed  and  increasing  efforts  against  her,  their 
close  alliance  with  such  as  openly  reject  the  Christian 
faith,  and  the  lax  and  unsound  principles  of  many  who 
profess  and  even  think  themselves  her  friends,"  were 
"  calculated  to  inspire  the  true  members  and  friends  of 
the  Church  with  the  deepest  uneasiness."  The  question 
of  keeping  up  the  Establishment  was  pushed  on  one  side 
as  of  comparatively  little  importance.  "The  most  obvious 
dangers,"  said  the  Suggestions,  "  are  those  which  impend 
over  the  Church  as  an  Establishment  ;  but  to  these  it  is 
not  here  proposed  to  direct  attention.  However  necessary 
it  may  be  on  the  proper  occasion  to  resist  all  measures 
which  threaten  the  security  of  Ecclesiastical  property 
and  privileges,  still  it  is  felt  that  there  are  perils  of  a 
character  more  serious  than  those  which  beset  the  politi- 
cal rights  and  temporalities  of  the  clergy."  A  brief  state- 
ment of  "  The  Objects  of  the  Association "  followed  the 
Suggestions.     They  were  as  follows  : — 

"  I.  To  maintain  pure  and  inviolate  the  doctrines,  the  services, 

and  the  discipline  of  the  Church ;  that  is,  to  withstand  all  change 
which  involves  the  denial  and  suppression  of  doctrine,  a  departure 
from  primitive  practice  in  religious  offices,  or  innovation  upon  the 
Apostolical  prerogatives,  order,  and  commission  of  bishops,  priests, 
and  deacons. 

"  2.  To  afford  Churchmen  an   opportunity  of  exchanging  their 
sentiments,  and  co-operating  together  on  a  large  scale."  ^ 

It  will  be  observed  that  these  were  "  objects  "  which 

^  Percival's  Collection  of  Letters,  pp.  13,  14. 
-  Palmer's  Narrative  of  Events,  pp.  104,  105. 


34  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

might  well  receive  the  countenance  and  aid  of  Evangelical 
Churchmen.  The  real  objects  of  the  wire-pullers  were,  in 
it,  kept  carefully  out  of  sight,  in  accordance,  no  doubt, 
with  that  doctrine  of  ''  Reserve  in  Communicating  Religious 
Knowledge,"  which  was  so  widely  adopted  by  the  Tract- 
arians  from  the  commencement  of  their  Movement.  On 
September  i8,  1833,  Newman  informed  Froude  :  ''Pal- 
mer is  about  to  make  a  journey  to  Hook  and  others,  and 
has  sounded  the  Evangelicals  of  Liverpool."  ^  On  Novem- 
ber 14,  1833,  one  of  the  leaders  of  the  party  wrote  to  a 
Member  of  Parliament,  with  reference  to  the  Association  : 
— "  We  want  to  unite  all  the  Church,  orthodox  and 
Evangelical,  clergy,  nobility,  and  people  in  maintenance 
of  our  doctrine  and  polity."  ^  A  little  over  two  months 
before  this  letter  was  written,  the  Rev.  J.  B.  Mozley 
wrote  to  his  sister  (September  3,  1833)  a  confidential 
letter,  in  which  he  revealed  the  real  object  of  what  he 
termed  a  "  Society  established  for  the  dissemination  of 
High  Church  principles."  ^  With  his  letter  Mr.  Mozley 
enclosed  some  of  the  Tracts,  which  he  described  as  "  the 
first  production  of  the  Society,"  and  added  this  signi- 
ficant opinion : — "  The  fact  is,  we  must  not  be  very 
scrupulous  as  to  views  or  particular  as  to  sentiments  in 
the  distribution  of  these  things." 

The  promoters  of  the  Association  at  once  set  to  work  to 
push  it  with  all  the  energy  of  young  and  enthusiastic  men. 
They  visited  various  parts  of  the  country,  taking  with  them 
copies  of  an  address  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  to 
be  signed  by  the  clergy.  "There  was  indeed,"  says  Mr. 
Palmer,  "  much  misapprehension  abroad  as  to  our  motives, 
and  we  had  no  means  of  explaining  those  motives,  without 
the  danger  of  giving  publicity  to  our  proceedings,  which, 
in  the  then  state  of  the  public  mind  on  Church  matters, 
might  have  led  to  dangerous  results."  *  Meetings  of  Church- 
men in  support  of  the  work  of  the  Association  were  held 
in  various  towns,  including  York,  Liverpool,  Nottingham, 

^  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  i.  p.  458. 

^  Palmer's  Nan-ative  of  Events,  p.  212. 

^  Mozley's  Letters,  p.  33. 

*  VaXraei's  Narrative  0/  Events,  p.  108. 


NEWMAN    AND    THE    EVANGELICALS  35 

Cheltenham,  Northampton,  Derby,  Plymouth,  Dorchester, 
Poole,  Norwich,  Newcastle,  Hull,  Bristol,  Bath,  and 
Gloucester.  But,  says  Mr.  Palmer,  "  so  great  was  the 
apprehension  at  this  time,  that  they  did  not  venture  at  first 
to  assemble  openly,  for  the  purpose  of  recording  their 
attachment  to  the  Established  Church  ;  admission  was  in 
general  restricted  to  those  friends  who  were  provided 
with  tickets."  ^  Enthusiastic  friends  rapidly  joined  the 
Association,  but  some  of  them  had  their  doubts  about 
portions  of  the  policy  adopted.  The  Rev.  S.  Rickards, 
for  instance,  wrote  to  Newman,  on  September  6,  1833  : — 
"As  far  as  my  opinion  goes  for  anything,  I  disapprove  of 
the  concealment  of  names."  ^  Two  days  later  Newman 
boasted  to  a  friend  of  the  cause  : — 

"  We  have  set  up  Church  Societies  all  over  the  kingdom,  or  at 
least  mean  to  do  so.  Already  the  seeds  of  revolution  are  planted 
in  Oxfordshire,  Berkshire,  Devonshire,  Gloucestershire,  Kent,  and 
Suffolk.  Our  object  is  to  maintain  the  doctrine  of  the  Apostolical 
Succession  and  save  the  Liturgy  from  illegal  alterations.  Hitherto 
we  have  had  great  success.  ...  It  is  no  slight  thing  to  be  made 
the  instrument  of  handing  down  the  principles  of  Laud  till  the  time 
comes.  .  .  ."^ 

There  is  here  a  provoking  omission  in  Newman's 
letter,  as  printed  in  his  Letters  and  Correspondence.  What 
"  time "  did  he  refer  to,  when  he  wrote  "  till  the  time 
come  "  ?  And  what  further  would  happen  when  the 
"  time "  came  ?  Newsman's  object  was  evidently  that  of 
propagating  a  system  which  had  ever  been  hateful  to  Pro- 
testants, whether  they  were  Evangelicals  or  not.  And 
yet,  with  the  cunning  worthy  of  a  Jesuit,  he  could  boast  to 
his  friend  Froude,  two  months  after,  that  his  real  ambition 
was  to  bring  back  Laudianism  : — 

"  Evangelicals,  as  I  anticipated,  are  struck  with  the  '  Law  of 
Liberty '  and  the  '  Sin  of  the  Church '  [referring,  no  doubt,  to 
expressions  in  the  eighth  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  issued  a 
few  days  previously].  The  subject  of  Discipline,  too  (I  cannot 
doubt),  will  take  them.     Surely  my  game  lies  among  them,"^ 

^  Palmer's  Narrative  of  Events,  p.  113.      '^  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  i.  p.  453. 
8  Ibid.  p.  454.  *  Ibid.  p.  479. 


36  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

The  men  who  were  sent  out  into  various  parts  of  the 
country  to  push  the  new  Association  received  "  instruc- 
tions "  for  their  guidance,  written  by  Newman,  headed 
"  Objects  of  your  Journey."  They  included  the  follow- 
ing : — "  To  form  local  Associations.  To  instruct  the  corre- 
sponding member.  To  sound  men  on  certain  questions." 
These  emissaries  were  termed  by  Newman  "Propagandists," 
and  with  the  subtlety  which  characterised  him  all  his  life, 
he  advised  them  thus  : — **  If  men  are  afraid  of  Apostolical 
ground  [i.e.  the  ground  of  Apostolical  Succession],  then  be 
cautious  of  saying  much  about  it.  If  desirous,  then  re- 
commend prudence  and  silence  upon  it  at  present."  ^ 

The  Clerical  Address  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
promoted  by  the  Association  was  extensively  signed,  and 
when  it  was  presented  to  his  Grace,  on  February  5,  1834, 
it  had  received  no  fewer  than  6530  signatures.  It  was 
presented  by  a  deputation,  which  included  the  Deans  of 
Lincoln,  Carlisle,  and  Chichester  ;  the  Archdeacons  of 
Canterbury,  London,  Middlesex,  Stowe,  Bedford,  Sarum, 
Brecon,  Taunton,  Rochester,  and  St.  Albans.  Archdeacon 
Froude,  father  of  Rev.  R.  H.  Froude,  termed  the  address 
a  "  milk  and  water  production  ";  ^  but  as  it  played  such  an 
important  part  in  the  early  history  of  the  Oxford  Move- 
ment, I  think  it  well  to  reproduce  it  here.  It  was  as 
follows  : — 

"We,  the  undersigned  Clergy  of  England  and  Wales,  are  de- 
sirous of  approaching  your  Grace  with  the  expression  of  our  venera- 
tion for  the  sacred  office,  to  which  by  Divine  Providence  you  have 
been  called,  of  our  respect  and  affection  for  your  personal  character 
and  virtues,  and  of  our  gratitude  for  the  firmness  and  discretion 
which  you  have  evinced  in  a  season  of  peculiar  difficulty  and 
danger. 

"At  a  time,  when  events  are  daily  passing  before  us  which  mark 
the  growth  of  Latitudinarian  sentiments,  and  the  ignorance  which 
prevails  concerning  the  spiritual  claims  of  the  Church,  we  are  espe- 
cially anxious  to  lay  before  your  Grace  the  assurance  of  our  devoted 
adherence  to  the  Apostolical  doctrine  and  polity  of  the  Church  over 
which  you  preside,  and  of  which  we  are  ministers ;  and  our  deep- 


^  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  4.  "  Ibid.  vol.  i.  p.  492. 


CLERICAL   AND    LAY    ADDRESSES  37 

rooted  attachment  to  that  venerable  Liturgy,  in  which  she  has  em- 
bodied, in  the  language  of  ancient  piety,  the  Orthodox  and  Primitive 
Faith. 

"  And  while  we  most  earnestly  deprecate  that  restless  desire  of 
change  which  would  rashly  innovate  in  spiritual  matters,  we  are  not 
less  solicitous  to  declare  our  firm  conviction,  that  should  anything, 
from  the  lapse  of  years  or  altered  circumstances,  require  renewal  or 
correction,  your  Grace,  and  our  other  spiritual  rulers,  may  rely  upon 
the  cheerful  co-operation  and  dutiful  support  of  the  Clergy  in  carry- 
ing into  effect  any  measures  that  may  tend  to  revive  the  discipline 
of  ancient  times,  to  strengthen  the  connection  between  the  Bishops, 
Clergy  and  people,  and  to  promote  the  purity,  the  efiiciency,  and 
the  unity  of  the  Church." 

This  Clerical  Address  to  the  Archbishop  was  followed 
by  one  from  the  laity  of  the  Church  of  England,  which 
was  written  by  Mr.  Joshua  Watson  and  signed  by  the  im- 
mense number  of  230,000  heads  of  families.  In  this 
Address  occurred  an  expression  of  approval  of  the  alliance 
between  the  Church  and  State,  which  was  conspicuous  by 
its  absence  from  that  which  emanated  from  the  clergy. 

"  In  the  preservation,  therefore,"  said  the  Lay  Address,  "  of  this 
our  National  Church  in  the  integrity  of  her  rights  and  privileges,  and 
in  her  alliance  with  the  State,  we  feel  that  we  have  an  interest  no  less 
real  and  no  less  direct  than  her  immediate  ministers  ;  and  we  accord- 
ingly avow  our  firm  determination  to  do  all  that  in  us  lies,  in  our 
several  stations,  to  uphold  unimpaired  in  its  security  and  efiiciency 
that  Establishment  which  we  have  received  as  the  richest  legacy  of 
our  forefathers."  ^ 

Although  Newman  became  one  of  the  earliest  members 
of  the  ''  Association  of  Friends  of  the  Church,"  his  heart 
was  never  in  it.  He  felt  himself  in  fetters  while  connected 
with  it.  His  imperious  will  would  brook  no  control. 
"We  shall,"  he  wrote  to  the  Rev.  C.  Girdlestone,  "  be  truly 
glad  of  your  co-operation,  as  of  one  who  really  fears  God 
and  wishes  to  serve  Him  ;  but  if  you  will  not,  zve  will  march 
past  you."  ^  And  so  he  "marched  past"  the  chief  friends 
of  the  Association,  who  were  anxious  to  move  forward  at 
a   slower  pace   than  suited  his  impetuous  temper.      He 

1  Churton's  Mauoir  of  Joshua  Watson,  p.  208,  and  edition. 
*  The  Early  History  of  Cardinal  Newman^  p.  77. 


30  HISTORY    OF   THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

finally  broke  away  from  the  Association,  which  soon  after 
came  to  an  end. 

The  first  great  work  undertaken  by  Newman  after  the 
Hadleigh  Conference  was  the  commencing  of  the  now 
well-known  Tracts  for  the  Times.  The  first  of  the  series 
was  issued  on  September  9,  1833,  and  the  last  on  January 
25,  1 84 1.  Of  these,  twenty  were  issued  before  the  close 
of  1833,  thirty  in  the  year  1834,  twenty  in  1835,  seven  in 
1836,  five  in  1837,  three  in  1838,  one  in  1839,  two  in 
1840,  and  two  in  1841.  Several  of  the  series  were  not 
really  "  Tracts  "  at  all,  but  large  volumes ;  Tract  LXXXI. 
ran  into  424  pages.  At  first  they  were  not  offered 
for  sale  to  the  public.  They  were,  says  Mr.  Palmer, 
''privately  printed  and  dispersed  amongst  friends  and 
correspondents  in  the  country."  ^  "  Probably,"  writes 
Cardinal  Newman's  sister,  "they  never  got  into  circula- 
tion through  ordinary  trade  machinery.  They  were  read 
by  thinkers  and  talkers,  they  were  widely  distributed, 
and  universally  discussed  ;  but  at  a  vast  expense  of  money, 
trouble,  and  worry  to  the  writers,  and  with  real  difficulty 
to  the  readers,  who  could  rarely  procure  them  through  the 
ordinary  channels."  ^  It  was  not  long  before  they  pro- 
duced a  spirit  of  well-founded  suspicion.  One  clergyman 
wrote  about  them  : — "  They  have  been  the  cause  of  more 
injury  to  the  united  operations  of  the  Church  than  can 
well  be  calculated "  ;  while  another  uttered  the  much 
needed  warning : — "  We  must  take  care  how  we  aid  the 
cause  of  Popery."  ^  Even  the  earliest  of  the  Tracts  fully 
justified  the  fears  of  the  enlightened  friends  of  the  Church 
of  England.  In  Tract  I.  the  Non-Episcopal  Churches 
were  declared  to  have  no  validly  ordained  Ministers,  and 
the  doctrine  of  ''Apostolical  Succession"  was  taught  in 
unmistakable  terms.  The  Tract  was  addressed  to  the 
clergy,  to  whom  Newman  said  : — "  We  must  necessarily 
consider  none  to  be  really  ordained  who  have  not  thus 
been  ordained" — i.e.  by  Bishops.  While  Non-Episcopal 
Ministers  were  thus  to  be  brought  down  to  the  level  of 

1  Palmer's  Narrative  of  Events,  p.  120.  ''■  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  44. 

'  Palmer's  Narrative  of  Events,  pp.  226,  227. 


THE    "TRACTS    FOR    THE   TIMES"  39 

ordinary  laymen,  the  Bishops  and  the  priests  were  to 
exalt  themselves  as  far  above  ordinary  mortals.  "  Exalt," 
he  exclaimed  to  the  clergy,  "  our  Holy  Fathers  the  Bishops, 
as  the  Representatives  of  the  Apostles,  and  the  Angels  of 
the  Churches ;  and  magnify  your  office,  as  being  ordained 
by  them  to  take  part  in  their  Ministry."  ^  In  the  third 
Tract  Newman  objected  to  "  Alterations  in  the  Liturgy," 
not,  however,  on  the  ground  that  revision  was  evil  in 
itself,  but  because  of  the  dangers  which  at  that  time  would 
have  attended  it.  In  a  note  to  the  fourth  Tract  Mr.  Keble 
discussed  the  question,  "  Where  is  the  competent  authority 
for  making  alterations  "  in  the  Liturgy  ?  And  he  answered 
it  negatively  only  : — "  It  does  not  lie  in  the  British  Legis- 
lature." ^  In  the  tenth  Tract  the  Bishops  were  raised 
almost  to  an  equality  with  the  Apostles.  "In  one  sense 
they  [the  Apostles]  are  still  alive  ;  I  mean,  they  did  not 
leave  the  world  without  appointing  persons  to  take  their 
place;  and  these  persons  ['the  Bishops ']  represent  them, 
and  may  be  considered  with  reference  to  us,  as  if 
they  were  the  Apostles."  ^  With  the  Bishops  the  clergy 
must  be  exalted  also.  "Then  you  [the  laity]  will  honour 
us  [the  clergy],"  says  this  Tract,  "  as  those  (if  I  may 
say  so)  who  are  intrusted  with  the  keys  of  heaven 
and  hell,  ...  as  intrusted  with  the  awful  and  mys- 
terious privilege  of  dispensing  Christ's  Body  and 
Blood."  '  This  last  sentence  was,  I  believe,  the  first  in 
which  the  Tractarians  taught  the  Real  Presence.  I  do  not 
wonder  that  directly  after  this  Tract  was  issued,  the  Tract- 
arians "  were  called  heretics,  Papists,"  as  Newman  admits 
in  a  letter  which  he  wrote  on  December  15,  1833,^  and 
it  is  not  astonishing  even  to  learn  that  some  persons  called 
Newman  "  a  Papist "  to  his  face.^  To  a  friend,  who  re- 
monstrated with  him  for  his  language  in  Tract  X.,  he 
candidly  acknowledged  : — "  In  confidence  to  a  friend,  I 
can  only  admit  it  was  imprudent,  for  I  do  think  we  have 
most  of  us  dreadfully  low  notions  of  the  Blessed  Sacra- 

^  Tracts  for  the  Times,  No.  I.  pp.  3,  4. 

'^Jbid.  No.  IV.  p.  8.  3  ji,ij_  No_  X.  p.  2.  *  Ibid.  pp.  5,  6. 

^'Newman's  Letters^  vol.  ii.  p.  8.  ®  Ibid.  p.  10. 


40  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

ment.  I  expect  to  be  called  a  Papist  when  my  opinions 
are  known."  ^  Startling,  then,  as  Newman's  opinion  was, 
as  expressed  in  Tract  X..,  that  publication  only  revealed  a 
portion  of  what  he  really  believed.  His  full  faith  was 
held  in  reserve,  to  be  revealed  on  some  more  auspicious 
occasion. 

It  may  be  useful  to  mention  here  the  names  of  the 
writers  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  and  the  Tracts  for  which 
each  was  responsible.  My  authority  for  this  list  is  the 
Appendix  to  the  third  volume  of  the  Life  of  Dr.  Ptisey. 
The  Rev.  J.  H.  Newman  wrote  Nos.  i,  2,  3,  6,  7,  8,  10, 
II,  19,  20,  21,  31,  33,  34,  38,  41,  45,  47,  71,  73,  74,  75, 
76,  79,  82,  83,  85,  88,  and  90.  The  Rev.  J.  Keble  wrote 
Nos.  4,  13,  40,  52,  54,  57,  60,  and  89.  The  Rev.  Thomas 
Keble,  Nos.  12,  22,  43,  and  part  of  84,  the  other  part 
being  written  by  the  Rev.  G.  Prevost.  The  Rev.  R.  H. 
Froude  wrote  Nos.  9,  59,  and  63.  Mr.  J.  W.  Bowden  (a 
layman)  wrote  Nos.  5,  29,  30,  56,  and  58.  The  Rev.  Dr. 
Pusey  wrote  Nos.  18,  66,  67,  68,  69,  77,  and  81.  Mr. 
Alfred  Menzies,  No.  14.  The  Rev.  B.  Harrison,  Nos. 
16,  17,  24,  and  49.  The  Rev.  R.  F.  Wilson,  No.  51. 
The  Rev.  A.  Buller,  No.  61.  The  Rev.  C.  P.  Eden,  No. 
32.  The  Rev.  H.  E.  Manning  (afterwards  Cardinal 
Manning),  part  of  No.  78,  the  other  part  being  by  the 
Rev.  C.  Marriott.  The  Rev.  Isaac  Williams,  Nos.  80,  86, 
and  87.  The  Rev.  A.  P.  Percival,  Nos.  23,  35,  and  36. 
Nos.  25,  26,  27,  28,  37,  39,  42,  44,  46,  48,  50,  53,  55, 
62,  64,  65,  70,  and  72,  were  reprints  from  old  authors. 

Next  to  Newman  and  Keble  the  most  noteworthy  of 
all  the  Tract  writers  was  Dr.  Pusey.  He  did  not  join  the 
Movement  at  its  commencement,  and,  when  he  did  join, 
the  fact  was  for  a  time  kept  a  secret  from  the  public. 
As  early  as  November  7,  1833,  Newman  was  able  to 
announce  to  Froude  that  "  Pusey  circulates  Tracts."  ^ 
On  November  13th  he  was  able  to  tell  another  friend  of 
the  cause  that  Pusey  had  joined  them,  but  that  his  name 
"  must   not   be   mentioned  as  of   our  party "  ;  ^   while  on 

^  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  i.  p.  490. 

2  Ibid.  p.  476.  »  Ibid.  p.  482. 


PUSEY    JOINS    THE    TRACTARIANS  41 

December  19th  he  was  able  to  communicate  the  good 
news  to  Mr.  F.  Rogers  (afterwards  Lord  Blackford) : — 
"  I  have  a  most  admirable  Tract  from  Pusey,  but  his 
name  must  not  yet  be  mentioned."  ^  At  length,  however, 
Pusey  was  drawn  into  the  net,  and  became  publicly  known 
as  connected  with  the  Tractarians,  and  this  is  how  it 
seems  to  have  come  about,  as  related  by  the  Rev.  Isaac 
Williams : — 

"  I  had,"  writes  Williams,  "up  to  this  time  no  acquaintance  with 
Pusey,  but  he  would  (now  that  we  had  lost  Froude  from  Oxford) 
join  Newman  and  myself  in  our  walks.  They  had  been  Fellows  of 
Oriel  together,  and  Newman  was  the  senior.  But  Pusey's  presence 
always  checked  his  lighter  and  unrestrained  mood ;  and  I  was 
myself  silenced  by  so  awful  a  person.  Yet  I  always  found  in  him 
something  most  congenial  to  myself — a  nameless  something  which 
was  wanting  even  in  Newman,  and,  I  might  almost  add,  even  in 
Keble.  But  Pusey  at  this  time  was  not  one  of  us,  and  I  have  some 
recollection  of  a  conversation  which  was  the  occasion  of  his  joining 
us.  He  said,  smiling  to  Newman  and  wrapping  his  gown  around 
him,  as  he  used  to  do,  'I  think  you  are  too  hard  upon  the  "Peculiars," 
as  you  call  them  {i.e.  the  Low  Church  party) ;  you  should  conciliate 
them.  I  am  thinking  of  writing  a  letter  myself  with  that  purpose,' 
or  rather  I  think  it  was  of  printing  a  letter  which  had  been  the 
result  of  private  correspondence.  '  Well,'  said  Newman,  '  suppose 
you  let  us  have  it  for  one  of  the  Tracts  ? '  '  Oh,  no,'  said  Pusey,  *  I 
will  not  be  one  of  you.'  This  was  said  in  a  playful  manner,  and 
before  we  parted  Newman  said,  'Suppose  you  let  us  have  that  letter 
of  yours,  which  you  intend  writing,  and  attach  your  own  name  or 
signature  to  it?  You  would  then  not  be  mixed  up  with  us,  or  be  in 
any  way  responsible  for  the  Tracts.'  'Well,'  Pusey  said  at  last,  'if 
you  will  let  me  do  that,  I  will.'  It  was  this  circumstance  of  Pusey 
attaching  his  initials  to  that  Tract  that  furnished  the  Record  and  the 
Low  Church  party  with  his  name,  which  they  at  once  attached  to 
us  all.  "2 

Mr.  Williams  seems  to  think  that  it  was  Pusey's  Tract 
on  Baptism  which  was  the  subject  of  conversation  on  this 
occasion,  but  in  this  his  memory  must  have  been  at  fault, 
for  Pusey's  initials  were  placed  on  Tract  XVIII.  (the  first 
he   wrote),   which  was    issued    on    December    21,    1833, 

^  Newman's  Letters.,  vol.  ii.  p.  9. 

^  Atitobiogi'aphy  of  Isaac  Williams,  pp.  70-72. 


42  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

while  the  first  of  those  he  wrote  on  Baptism  was  not 
pubUshed  until  August  24,  1835 — one  year  and  eight 
months  after.  This  first  of  the  Tracts  written  by  Pusey, 
was  entitled  "Thoughts  on  the  Benefits  of  the  System  of 
Fasting,  Enjoined  by  Our  Church."  In  urging  upon  his 
readers  the  observance  of  Fasting  Dr.  Pusey  was,  to  a 
considerable  extent,  on  common  ground  with  Evangelical 
Churchmen,  and  even  with  Puritans,  though  he  attached 
greater  value  to  the  practice  than  they  have  done.  He 
quoted  the  Church's  Homily  of  Fasling  in  support  of  his 
views,  but  omitted  from  his  extracts  some  cautions  which 
are,  perhaps,  as  necessary  for  these  times  as  when  they 
were  first  put  forth,  such,  for  instance,  as  the  following  : — 

'*  To  fast  then,  with  this  persuasion  of  mind,  that  our  fasting  and 
other  good  works  can  make  us  good,  perfect,  and  just  men,  and 
finally  bring  us  to  heaven,  is  a  devilish  persuasion  ;  and  that  fast  is 
so  far  off  from  pleasing  of  God,  that  it  refuseth  His  mercy,  and  is 
altogether  derogatory  to  the  merits  of  Christ's  death  and  His  precious 
blood  shedding.  This  doth  the  parable  of  the  Pharisee  and  the 
Publican  teach."  ^ 

It  was  not  quite  fair  either,  on  the  part  of  Dr.  Pusey, 
to  omit  any  mention  of  the  real  reason  why  so  many  Fast 
Days  are  mentioned  in  the  Prayer-Book  Calendar.  Any 
one  who  consults  Cardwell's  Dodrmal  Annals  of  the 
Reformed  Church  of  England  will  learn  that  they  were 
appointed,  not  in  the  interests  of  religion,  but  in  the 
interests  of  the  fishermen  of  the  time,  who,  but  for  these 
Fast  Days,  in  which  fish  and  not  flesh  was  eaten,  would 
have  been  utterly  ruined.  They  were  the  days  mentioned 
by  the  Homily  on  Fasting,  as  ''  appointed  by  public  order 
and  laws  made  by  Princes,  and  by  the  authority  of  the 
magistrates,  upon  policy,  not  respecting  any  religion  at  all  in 
the  same."  "^  In  1576  Queen  Elizabeth's  Council  sent  a 
letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  requiring  him  to 
enforce  the  observance  of  these  Fast  Days,  and  requesting 
him  to  "  give  order  "  to  the  Ministers  in  his  province  that 

^  Homily  of  Fasting,  Part  I. 
2  Ibid.  Part  II. 


"BEGINNING    OF    A    CATHOLIC    MOVEMENT"  43 

they,  in  their  sermons,  should  teach  the  people  that  the 
observance  of  these  days  "  is  not  required  for  any  liking 
of  Popish  ceremonies  heretofore  used  (which  utterly  are 
detested),  but  only  to  maintain  the  mariners  and  navy  in 
this  land,  by  setting  men  a  fishing."  ^ 

In  January,  1834,  the  new  Tracts  for  the  Times  came 
under  the  notice  of  Mr.  Ambrose  Phillipps  De  Lisle,  a 
wealthy  Leicestershire  squire,  and  a  pervert  to  Romanism. 
On  reading  Tract  IV.  he  returned  it  to  the  gentleman  who 
had  lent  it  to  him,  with  this  remarkakle  assertion  :  "  Mark 
my  words,  these  Tracts  are  the  beginning  of  a  Catholic 
Movement  which  will  one  day  end  in  the  return  of  her 
Church  to  Catholic  unity  and  the  See  of  Peter."  ^  Having 
formed  such  a  hopeful  view  of  the  work  of  the  Tractarians 
it  is  not  wonderful  to  learn  that  De  Lisle  spent  the  best 
years  of  a  prolonged  life  in  supporting  the  Oxford  Move- 
ment in  the  interests  of  the  Pope.  The  Tract  which  thus 
impressed  this  young  Roman  Catholic  squire  was  an  argu- 
ment in  favour  of  Apostolic  Succession,  and  it  asserted 
that,  "  Except,  therefore,  we  can  show  such  a  warrant 
[that  is,  of  '  commissioned  persons '],  we  [the  clergy] 
cannot  be  sure  that  our  hands  convey  the  sacrifice;  we  cannot 
be  sure  that  souls  worthily  prepared,  receiving  the  bread 
which  we  break,  and  the  cup  of  blessing  which  we  bless, 
are  partakers  of  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ."  The 
writer  further  asserted  of  the  Church  of  England  that  she 
is  "  the  only  Church  in  this  realm  which  has  a  right  to 
be  quite  sure  that  she  has  the  Lord's  Body  to  give  to  His 
people."  ^  In  Tract  X.,  which  had  been  published  before 
De  Lisle  wrote  his  opinion,  Newman  urged  that  the  clergy 
should  be  considered  "  as  if  they  were  the  Apostles  "  ;  and 
as  saying  to  the  laity  : — 

"Then  you  will  honour  us,  with  a  purer  honour  than  many  men 
do  now,  namely,  as  those  (if  I  may  say  so)  who  are  intrusted  with 
the  keys  of  heaven  and  hell,  as  the  heralds  of  mercy,  as  the  de- 
nouncers of  woe  to  wicked  men,  as  intrusted  with  the  awful  and 


^  Caldwell's  Documentary  Annals,  vul.  i.  p.  427. 

^  Life  and  Letters  of  Ambrose  Phillipps  De  Lisle,  vol.  i.  p.  199. 

3  Tract  No.  IV.  pp.  2-5. 


44  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

mysterious  privilege  of  dispensing  Christ's  Body  and  Blood,  as  far 
greater  than  the  most  powerful  and  wealthiest  of  men  in  our  unseen 
strength  and  our  heavenly  riches."  ^ 

Thus  did  Priestcraft  rear  once  more  its  proud  head 
in  the  Reformed  Church  of  England  and  demand  of  the 
laity  that  they  should  meekly  bow  their  necks  to  its 
arrogant  sway. 

Mr.  Francis  Lyne,  a  highly  respected  layman,  when  in 
his  seventy-ninth  year,  wrote  to  me  on  January  ii, 
1879,  from  5  Seagrave  Place,  Cheltenham: — "The  state 
we,  as  Protestants,  are  now  in  was  foretold  by  the  Roman 
Catholic  party  many  years  ago.  My  relation,  the  late  Mr. 
John  Adolphus,  a  notable  Q.C.,  one  day  on  leaving  the 
Temple — just  when  the  Tracts  for  the  Times  appeared — 
was  joined  by  a  Roman  Catholic,  and  he  said:— -'Ah! 
Adolphus,  this  is  the  grandest  move  for  our  Church  there 
has  been  since  the  Reformation.' " 

It  was  not  long  before  voices  of  warning  were  heard. 
Dr.  Pusey  sent  his  Tract  on  Fasting  to  Dr.  Arnold,  the 
famous  Head  Master  of  Rugby,  who  was  not  long  in  finding 
out  what  way  the  Tractarians  were  going.  In  acknowledg- 
ing, on  February  18,  1834,  the  receipt  of  the  Tract,  Arnold 
told  Pusey  a  few  plain  truths,  the  wisdom  of  which  can 
be  seen  now  after  many  days.  "  By  the  form  in  which 
your  Tract  appears,  I  fear  you  are  lending  your  co-opera- 
tion to  a  party  second  to  none  in  the  tendency  of  their 
principles  to  overthrow  the  truth  of  the  Gospel.  ...  I 
stand  amazed  at  some  apparent  efforts  in  this  Protestant 
Church  to  set  up  the  idol  of  Tradition ;  that  is,  to 
render  Gibbon's  conclusion  against  Christianity  valid, 
by  taking,  like  him,  the  Fathers  and  the  second  and 
subsequent  periods  of  the  Christian  History  as  a  fair 
specimen  of  the  Apostles  and  of  the  true  doctrines 
of  Christ.  But  Ignatius  will  far  sooner  sink  the 
authority  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  John  than  they  com- 
municate   any    portion    of    theirs   to    him.     The    system 

1  Trad  No.  X.  pp.  2-5. 

2  Palmer's  Narrative  of  Events,  pp.  226,  227. 


ARNOLD    ON    TRACTARIANISM  45 

pursued  in  Oxford  seems  to  be  leading  to  a  revival  of  the 
Nonjurors,  a  party  far  too  mischievous  and  too  foolish 
ever  to  be  revived  with  success.  But  it  may  be  revived 
enough  to  do  harm,  to  cause  the  ruin  of  the  Church  of  England 
first,  and,  so  far  as  human  folly  can,  to  obstruct  the  pro- 
gress of  the  Church  of  Christ."  ^ 

^  Life  0/  Piisey,  vol.  i.  pp.  282,  283. 


CHAPTER    III 

The  first  "outbreak  of  Tractism '' — Dr.  Hampden's  case— Newman  on 
Subscription  to  the  Articles — He  was  "not  a  great  friend  to  them" — 
Hampden  appointed  Regius  Professor  of  Divinity — Agitation  against 
his  appointment — Lord  Melbourne's  letter  to  Pusey — Newman's 
Elucidatt07ts — Stanley's  opinion  of  them — Dr.  Wilberforce  and 
Hampden — Lord  Selborne  and  Dean  Church's  testimony  as  to 
Hampden's  views — The  real  cause  of  opposition  was  Hampden's  Pro- 
testantism— Proof  of  his  Protestantism — Extracts  from  his  writings — 
Vote  of  want  of  confidence  by  Convocation — Hampden's  Letter  to 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury— Mr.  Macmullen's  case — Hampden 
apppointed  Bishop  of  Hereford — Protest  of  thirteen  Bishops — 
Lord  John  Russell's  reply — Archdeacon  Hare  defends  Hampden — 
A  Prosecution  commenced — Organised  by  Pusey,  Keble,  Marriott, 
and  Mozley — Wilberforce's  eleven  questions  for  Hampden — His 
answer — The  Bishop  withdraws  his  Letters  of  Request — Pusey's 
bitter  disappointment — Tractarian  anxiety  to  prosecute  their  oppo- 
nents— Bishop  Phillpotts  denounces  the  Episcopal  Veto — Protests  by 
the  Dean  of  Hereford— Hampden  elected  Bishop  by  the  Chapter  of 
Hereford — Protest  in  Bow  Church — An  exciting  scene — Consecra- 
tion of  Dr.  Hampden— The  new  Bishop's  sympathisers — Addresses 
of  confidence. 

What  Archbishop  Whately  termed  "  the  first  outbreak  of 
Tractism  "  was  directed  against  the  Rev.  Dr.  R.  D.  Hamp- 
den. In  1832  Dr.  Hampden  had  been  selected  to  preach 
the  Bampton  Lectures  at  Oxford,  which  were  subsequently 
pubHshed  under  the  title  of  The  Scholastic  Philosophy  Con- 
sidered in  its  RehUion  to  Christian  Theology.  These  lectures 
were  delivered  to  large  congregations  ;  but  do  not  appear 
to  have  excited  any  remarkable  attention  after  their  publi- 
cation, until  their  author  was  appointed,  in  1836,  Regius 
Professor  of  Divinity  in  the  University  of  Oxford,  when 
they  became  the  centre  round  which  a  fierce  contest 
raged,  a  contest  which  was  renewed  with  even  greater 
violence    in    1847,    when    Dr.    Hampden   was   appointed 

Bishop  of    Hereford.      A   pamphlet   which    he  issued  in 

46 


THE    HAMPDEN    CONTROVERSY  47 

1834  added  greatly  to  the  flame  of  Tractarian  wrath,  and 
was  used  against  its  author  again  and  again  during  the 
succeeding  thirteen  years.  It  bore  the  title  of  Observations 
on  Rcligiotts  Dissent.  With  Particular  Reference  to  the  Use  of 
Religious  Tests  in  the  University.  It  was,  in  brief,  a  plea 
for  the  admission  of  Dissenters  into  the  University  of 
Oxford,  on  certain  conditions.  He  wished  to  abolish  Sub- 
scription to  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles  on  the  part  of  those 
entering  the  University,  as  had  already  been  done  in  the 
University  of  Cambridge,  and  therefore  there  was  nothing 
new  in  his  proposal  in  itself,  though  no  doubt  it  seemed 
revolutionary  to  the  authorities  of  the  University  of  Oxford, 
and  was  particularly  distasteful  to  those  Tractarians  who 
wished  to  keep  Dissenters  out  of  the  University.  Newman 
led  the  attack  on  Hampden's  pamphlet,  a  copy  of  which 
the  author  had  sent  to  him  on  its  pubHcation.  In  thank- 
ing him  for  his  courtesy,  Newman  wrote  : — "  While  I  re- 
spect the  tone  of  piety  in  which  the  pamphlet  is  written, 
I  feel  an  aversion  to  the  principles  it  professes,  as  (in  my 
opinion),  legitimately  tending  to  formal  Socinianism."  ^ 
Newman's  real  opinion  as  to  Subscription  to  the  Thirty- 
Nine  Articles  was  given  on  January  11,  1836,  in  a  letter 
which  he  addressed  to  Mr.  Percival,  in  the  course  of  which 
his  hatred  for  the  study  of  Christian  Evidences,  and  his 
wish  that  young  men  should  believe  "  prior  to  reason  "  ; 
and  should,  without  reason,  accept  what  their  instructors 
taught  them,  is  clearly  manifested.  "  Shut  your  eyes,  and 
open  your  mouths,  and  take  what  the  priests  may  give  you, 
without  examination,"  is  a  policy  which  is  ever  dear  to  a 
proud  Sacerdotal  priesthood  ;  but  is  quite  inconsistent  with 
the  Scriptural  injunction  : — "  Believe  not  every  spirit, 
but  try  the  spirits  whether  they  are  of  God  ;  because  many 
false  prophets  are  gone  out  in  the  world  "  (i  John  iv.  i). 

"The  advantage  of  subscription  (to  my  mind)  is,"  Newman 
wrote,  "its  witnessing  to  the  principle  that  religion  is  to  be  ap- 
proached with  a  submission  of  the  understanding.     Nothing  is  so 

^  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  77. 


48  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

common,  as  you  must  know,  as  for  young  men  to  approach  serious 
subjects  as  judges,  to  study  them  as  mere  sciences.  Aristotle  and 
Butler  are  treated  as  teachers  of  a  system,  not  as  if  there  was 
more  truth  in  them  than  in  Jeremy  Bentham.  The  study  of  the 
'Evidences,^  now  popular  (such  as  FaUys),  encourages  this  evil  frame 
of  mind.  The  learner  is  supposed  external  to  the  system  .  .  .  and 
to  have  to  choose  it  by  an  act  of  reason  before  he  submits  to  it ; 
whereas,  the  great  lesson  of  the  Gospel  is  faith,  an  obeying  prior  to 
reasoning,  and  proving  its  reasonableness  by  making  experiment  of 
it — a  casting  of  heart  and  mind  into  the  system  and  investigating 
the  truth  by  practice.  I  should  say  the  same  of  a  person  in  a 
Mahometan  country  or  under  any  system  which  was  not  plainly 
and  purely  diabolical  ^  .  .  .  In  an  age,  then,  when  this  great 
principle  is  scouted.  Subscription  to  the  Articles  is  a  memento  and 
a  protest,  and  again  actually  does,  I  believe,  impress  upon  the 
minds  of  young  men  the  teachable  and  subdued  temper  expected 
of  them.  They  are  not  to  reason,  but  to  obey,  and  this  quite 
independently  of  the  degree  of  accuracy,  the  wisdom,  &c.,  of  the 
Articles  themselves.  /  am  no  great  friend  of  them,  and  should 
rejoice  to  substitute  the  Creeds  for  them,  were  it  not  for  the  Roman- 
ists, who  might  be  excluded  by  the  plan  you  suggest  of  demanding 
certificates  of  baptism  and  confirmation."  ^ 

This  is,  I  think,  the  first  recorded  instance  in  which 
Tractarian  dislike  to  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles  was  clearly 
expressed.  In  later  years  members  of  the  party  spoke  out 
more  emphatically.  A  collection  of  extracts  from  their 
utterances  on  this  subject  will  be  found  in  the  Appendix 
to  my  Secret  History  of  the  Oxford  Movement.  Newman's 
exhortation  to  young  men  "  not  to  reason,  but  to 
OBEY,"  reminds  me  of  the  advice  of  a  priestly  member 
of  the  English  Church  Union.  "  It  was  not,"  said  the 
Rev.  Luke  Rivington,  at  a  meeting  of  the  Union,  January 
14,  1868,  "that  he  undervalued  the  office  of  the  laity, 
whose  high  and  noble  prerogative  it  ivas  to  listen  and  obey ; 
but  it  was  for  the  ministers  of  the  Church  to  magnify 
their  office."  ^  A  Ritualistic  newspaper  recently  put  the 
matter  thus  :  ''  In  the  Catholic  Church  it  is  for  the  clergy 

_  ^  In  other  words,  this  is  equivalent  to  advising  a  young  man  to  swallow  any 
spiritual  poison  offered  to  him  first,  and  after  it  has  done  its  deadly  work  he 
will  be  able  to  refuse  to  take  any  more  of  it.  Such  advice  would  justify  a  belief 
in  any  lying  legend  taught  by  a  Roman  Catholic  priest. 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Ptisey,  vol.  i.  p.  301. 

3  English  Church  IJnion  Monthly  Circular,  vol.  for  1868,  p.  65. 


HAMPDEN'S    LATITUDINARIANISM  49 

to  teach  and  govern,  for  the  people  to  obey."  ^  This 
kind  of  teaching  tends  to  make  slaves  of  the  laity,  and 
enables  the  clergy  to  assume  the  position  of  ''  being  lords 
over  God's  heritage"  (i  Peter  v.  3). 

There  was  a  Latitudinarian  spirit  throughout  Dr. 
Hampden's  pamphlet  which  I,  for  one,  deeply  regret, 
especially  in  his  remarks  on  Unitarians.  He  avowed 
himself  as  ''  favourable  to  a  removal  of  all  tests,  so  far 
as  they  are  employed  as  securities  of  orthodoxy  among 
our  members  at  large."  "^  As  to  the  Unitarians,  he 
specially  applied  to  them  the  following  statement :  "  In 
religion,  properly  so  called,  few  Christians,  if  any  (I 
speak,  of  course,  of  pious  minds)  really  differ "  ;  and 
he  further  declared,  "When  I  look  at  the  reception  by 
the  Unitarians,  both  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  I 
cannot,  for  my  part,  strongly  as  I  dislike  their  theology, 
deny  to  those,  who  acknowledge  this  basis  of  divine  facts, 
the  name  of  Christians."  ^  He  was  no  great  friend  to 
articles  of  faith  :  "  Articles  of  religious  communion,"  he 
declared,  "  from  their  reference  to  the  fixed  objects  of 
our  faith,  assume  an  immovable  character  fatally  adverse 
to  all  theological  improvement."  *  Though  in  favour  of 
admitting  Dissenters  to  the  University  without  subscribing 
to  the  Articles,  Dr.  Hampden  insisted  that  when  they 
entered  they  should  receive  religious  instruction  from 
clergymen  of  the  Church  of  England.  "  I  see,"  he  wrote, 
"  no  objection  at  the  same  time  to  the  admission  of 
Dissenters  into  the  University,  because  they  are  Dissenters. 
I  should  be  glad  indeed  to  see  them  appearing  among  us, 
as  on  a  neutral  ground,  on  which  we  may  forget  war, 
and  learn  together  the  arts  of  peace  and  charity.  If 
persons  of  different  communions  are  willing  to  conform 
to  our  discipline,  and  receive  instruction  from  us,  know- 
ing that  we  are  members  of  the  Church  of  England,  and 
sincere  teachers  of  its  theological  system,  where  can  be 
the  real  objection  in  such  a  case  ?  "  ^ 

^  Church  Review,  August  23,  1900,  p.  583. 

2  Hampden's  Observations  on  Religious  Dissent,  2nd  edition,  p.  35. 

^  Ibid.  p.  20.  *  Ibid.  p.  22.  »  /^^v/.  p.  ^4. 

D 


50  HISTORY    OF   THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

The  Tractarian  party  took  the  lead  in  resisting  every 
attempt  to  admit  Dissenters  into  the  University  of 
Oxford,  and  with  such  success  that  it  was  not  until 
1854  that  Subscription  to  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles  was 
made  no  longer  compulsory  as  a  condition  of  matri- 
culation. 

Towards  the  end  of  1835,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Burton,  Regius 
Professor  of  Divinity  at  Oxford,  died.  At  that  time  Lord 
Melbourne  was  Prime  Minister.  The  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury  (Dr.  Howley),  whose  sympathies  were  to  a 
considerable  extent  with  the  new  Oxford  Movement,  sent 
to  his  lordship  a  list  of  persons  w^hom  he  conceived  to  be 
best  qualified  to  succeed  Dr.  Burton.  Eight  names  were 
mentioned  by  his  Grace,  the  first  being  Dr.  Pusey  ;  the 
fourth,  the  Rev.  J.  H.  Newman;  and  the  fifth,  the  Rev. 
John  Keble.  Lord  Melbourne  consulted  Archbishop 
Whately  as  to  the  merits  of  these  gentlemen.  "  It  will  be 
observed,"  writes  Canon  Liddon,  "  that  each  of  the  three 
leaders  of  the  Movement,  as  they  subsequently  became, 
was  named  by  the  Archbishop  for  the  vacant  Chair  of 
Divinity.  What  might  not  have  been  the  result  on  the 
future  of  the  English  Church  had  any  one  of  them  been 
chosen  ! "  ^  Whatever  may  be  said  against  the  gentleman 
who  succeeded  Dr.  Burton,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
his  appointment  was  a  serious  blow  to  the  hopes  of  the 
sacerdotalists.  A  rumour  of  Dr.  Hampden's  appointment 
reached  Oxford  on  February  8,  1836.  No  time  was  lost 
in  getting  up  an  agitation  against  it.  That  very  evening 
Pusey  brought  his  friends  together  at  a  dinner  party,  at 
which  the  case  w^as  fully  discussed.  There  was  still  a 
hope  that  an  agitation  would  prevent  the  dreaded  appoint- 
ment being  made.  Two  days  later  another  meeting  was 
held  in  Corpus  Common  Room,  at  which  a  petition  to  the 
King  was  agreed  to,  and  by  the  next  evening  it  was  sent 
off  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  for  presentation  to 
his  Majesty,  signed  by  seventy-three  resident  Masters.  It 
seems  to  have  produced  a  considerable  effect  upon  the 
King,  who  at  once  communicated  with  Lord  Melbourne. 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  i.  p.  370. 


LORD    MELBOURNE'S    OPINION  5 1 

The    Prime    Minister,    however,    remained    firm,   and    on 
February  15th,  wrote  to  William  IV.: — 

"To  what  do  the  charges  against  Dr.  Hampden  amount? 
That  Dr.  Hampden  is  known  to  have  expressed  himself  in  printed 
publications  in  such  a  manner  as  to  produce  on  the  minds  of  many 
an  impression  that  he  maintains  doctrines  and  principles  funda- 
mentally opposed  to  the  integrity  of  the  Christian  faith.  Is  this 
sufficient  ?  Is  his  faith  to  be  denied  on  such  grounds  as  these — 
'an  impression  on  the  minds  of  many,'  without  even  stating  whether 
in  the  opinion  of  those  who  signed  the  paper  the  impression  is  just? 
There  are  innumerable  impressions  upon  the  minds  of  many,  but 
who  ever  considered  such  impressions  as  any  proof  against  the 
person  whom  they  affected  ?  "  ^ 

Archbishop  Whately  lost  no  time  in  informing  the 
Prime  Minister  what  was,  in  his  opinion,  the  real  secret 
of  the  opposition  to  Hampden's  appointment.  "  Hamp- 
den," he  wrote,  "  is  not  a  Tory.  And  he  was  for  the 
relaxation  of  the  subscription  to  the  Articles  at  Matri- 
culation. Hence  it  is  that  men  now  bring  a  charge  of 
heresy  against  him  which,  if  they  had  been  sincere 
and  honest,  they  would  have  brought  before  the  regular 
tribunal  three  or  four  years  ago,  when  he  was  deliver- 
ing before  the  University  of  Oxford  and  printing  at  the 
University  Press  the  sermons  which  they  charge  with 
Socinianism."  ^ 

No  stone  was  left  unturned  to  prevent  the  appoint- 
ment. Pusey  hoped  that  he  could  reach  the  heart  or 
move  the  will  of  Lord  Melbourne,  and  therefore  he  lost 
no  time  in  writing  to  him  what  Newman  has  termed 
"  one  of  his  most  earnest,  weightiest,  crushing  letters  "  ; 
but  all  in  vain,  for  Newman  adds  that  Lord  Melbourne 
"  answered  him  cleverly  and  sharply,  and  did  not  conceal 
the  great  antipathy  he  felt  in  consequence  towards  Pusey."  ^ 
The  answer  is  printed  in  full  in  Lord  Melbourne  s  Papers. 
It  was  dated  February  24,  and  contains  a  hint  that  Pusey 

^  Lord  Melbourne^ s  Papers,  p.  499. 

^  Ibid.  p.  501. 

^  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  158. 


52  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

would  do  well    to   clean   out   his  own  stables   before   he 
attempted  to  clean  those  of  other  persons  : — 

"  Your  principle,"  he  wrote,  "  would  make  the  opinions  of  the 
present  Professors  the  standard  of  every  future  appointment.  Before 
persons  are  chosen  on  account  of  the  consonance  of  their  tenets 
with  those  of  the  individuals  who  at  present  fill  the  theological  chairs, 
you  must  admit  that  we  must  a  little  consider  what  are  the  tenets  of 
those  gentlemen  ;  and  you  are  very  well  aware  that  great  alarm  has 
been  excited  in  the  minds  of  many  whose  authority  I  respect  by 
certain  tenets,  which  have,  I  believe,  been  published  anonymously, 
but  with  which  you  are  supposed  to  have  had  some  connection,  and 
which  are  represented  to  me  to  be  of  a  novel  character  and  incon- 
sistent with  the  hitherto  received  doctrines  of  the  Church  of 
England.  I  have  not  seen  the  Tracts  I  refer  to,  and  I  should  be 
glad  to  obtain  them ;  I  only  speak  from  what  I  hear.  I  therefore 
mean  to  pronounce  no  opinion  upon  them."^ 

Meanwhile  the  Committee  for  resisting  Dr.  Hampden 
continued  its  sittings  in  Corpus  Christi  College.  They 
brought  before  the  Heads  of  Houses  a  petition  asking 
them  to  bring  before  Convocation  a  censure  of  the 
alleged  errors  of  Dr.  Hampden.  Th^t  gentleman, 
however,  heard  of  the  proposal  in  time,  went  to 
the  special  meeting  of  the  Heads  of  Houses,  and  de- 
feated, for  the  time  being,  the  plot  against  himself.  Writing 
to  his  friend.  Archbishop  Whately,  on  February  17th, 
he  tells  him  what  occurred.  "  At  a  special  meeting " 
of  the  Board  of  Heads  of  Houses,  he  wrote,  "  on  Thursday 
last,  it  was  the  subject  of  deliberation  whether  any  step 
should  be  taken  by  the  Board  in  consequence  of  the 
rumour  that  it  was  the  intention  of  Ministers  to  place  me 
m  the  Divinity  Chair.  Numbers  were  canvassed  before- 
hand in  order  to  get  a  majority  for  the  hostile  measure 
designed,  and  they  tried,  out  of  mock  kindness,  to  prevent 
my  attendance.  I  did  attend,  however,  to  confront  their 
folly  and  intolerance,  and  with  the  kind  and  skilful  support 
of  the  Provost  of  Oriel  succeeded  in  disappointing  their 
attempt,"  ^ 

Mr.  Henry  George  Liddell,  afterwards  well  known  as 

^  Lord  Melbourne's  Papers,  p.  504. 

"^  Memorials  of  Bishop  Hampden,  p.  54, 


NEWMAN'S    "ELUCIDATIONS"  53 

Dean  of  Christ  Church,  Oxford,  was  in  Oxford  at  the  time 
of  the  Hampden  controversy,  and  wrote  an  interesting 
description  of  the  meeting  of  the  Heads  of  Houses,  at 
which  Dr.  Hampden  was  present  : — 

"On  Wednesday,"  wrote  Mr.  Liddell,  "the  Heads  of  Houses, 
roused  by  the  energy  of  the  Movement  party,  called  a  meeting.  To 
the  horror  and  surprise  of  the  Doctors,  the  Principal  of  St.  Mary 
Hall  (Dr.  Hampden)  himself  appeared.  '  Strange,'  said  the  Dean 
of  Christ  Church,  'very  strange  that  you  should  be  here,  Mr. 
Principal :  we  have  met  to  talk  of  you.  Do  you  mean  to  stay  ? ' 
*I  do,'  was  the  reply.  'And  to  vote?'  interposed  Shuttleworth 
(Warden  of  New  College).  '  I  have  not  made  up  my  mind,'  said 
Hampden.  A  very  angry  discussion  followed,  after  which  certain 
propositions  (I  know  not  what)  were  put  to  the  vote.  On  the  first 
two  Hampden  was  left  in  a  minority,  himself  taking  no  part.  On 
the  third  the  division  was  equal,  whereupon  Dr.  Hampden  inter- 
posed, and  by  his  vote  turned  the  decision  of  the  august  body  in  his 
own  favour."  ^ 

Newman  was  quick  in  perceiving  that  attacks  Hke  these 
needed  supplementing  by  material  of  a  more  formidable 
kind.  He  therefore  at  once  set  to  work  to  write  a  pamphlet 
containing  extracts  from  Hampden's  published  works,  add- 
ing to  them  such  comments  as  he  thought  necessary.  It 
was  published  on  February  13th,  only  five  days  after 
the  rumour  of  the  appointment  had  reached  Oxford.  He 
had  to  sit  up  all  through  one  night  writing,  so  as  to  get  it 
out  as  quickly  as  possible.  It  bore  the  title  of  Elucidations 
of  Dr.  Hampden  s  Theological  Statements,  and  formed  a  pamph- 
let of  forty-seven  pages.  It  was  certainly  the  most  influential 
document  ever  produced  against  Dr.  Hampden  ;  and  yet, 
by  friends  and  foes  alike,  it  was  censured  for  unfairness. 
Mr.  Arthur  Penrhyn  Stanley,  subsequently  known  as 
Dean  Stanley,  was  at  that  time  in  residence  at  Oxford, 
and  took  the  deepest  interest  in  the  Hampden  controversy. 
He  did  not  approve  of  the  new  appointment  to  the  Divinity 
Chair,  but  when  the  Elucidations  appeared,  he  attacked  the 
pamphlet  in  the  most  vigorous  style. 

^  Henry  George  Liddell,  D.D,:  A  Memoir,  p.  33. 


54  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

"  No  one,"  he  remarked,  "  who  has  not  compared  Newman  and 
Pusey's  ^  extracts  with  the  original  writings  of  Hampden,  and  who 
has  not  had  experience,  in  himself  or  others,  of  the  fearfully  erron- 
eous impression  that  those  extracts  convey,  can  duly  appreciate  the 
appearance  that  must  have  presented  itself  to  Arnold's  mind  of 
shameless  and  wilful  fabrication.  If  they  (the  extracts)  had  been 
made  by  any  one  else  than  Newman  and  Pusey,  I  should  not  have 
hesitated  to  attribute  them  to  wilful  dishonesty;  as  it  is,  I  must 
call  it  culpable  carelessness,  blindness,  and  recklessness,  in  matters 
of  the  most  vital  importance  to  the  Church  and  nation,  and  to  the 
peace  of  a  good  man.  They  have  applied  to  doctrines  what 
Hampden  says  of  phraseology,  to  the  Atonement  what  he  said  of 
Penance,  to  denial  of  Sacramental  Grace,  and  original  sin,  and 
regeneration,  and  Trinitarianism,  what  he  has  said  in  confirmation 
and  approval  of  all  these  truths.  They  have,  till  they  were  com- 
pelled by  counter-pamphlets  to  notice  that  there  were  such  books, 
kept  out  of  sight  his  Parochial  Sermons  and  Philosophical  Evidences, 
which  contain  the  very  essence  of  orthodoxy ;  they  have  attacked 
him  because  he  has  impugned  their  own  peculiar  theory  of  Church 
authority,  and  the  submission  of  human  reason,  and  have  enlisted 
in  their  ranks  persons  who  differ  as  entirely  from  that  theory  as  does 
Hampden  himself;  and  all  this  while  they  themselves  hold  tenets 
barely  compatible  with  their  remaining  in  the  English  Church."  ^ 

Newman's  Elucidations  had  a  most  powerful  effect  on 
the  public  mind.  People  were  entirely  guided  by  the 
pamphlet  who  had  never  read  a  word  of  Hampden's 
writings  in  his  published  books.  The  Rev.  T.  Mozley, 
one  of  the  opponents  of  Hampden,  and  all  his  life  through 
a  friend  of  the  Oxford  Movement,  frankly  tells  us  that 
when  Hampden  was  condemned  by  the  Oxford  Convoca- 
tion : — 

"The  great  mass  of  the  multitude  that  inflicted  this  penalty  were 
very,  if  not  entirely,  ignorant  of  the  book  which  was  the  corpus  delicti. 
They  might  have  seen  it  on  a  counter,  or  on  a  table ;  they  might 
have  opened  it,  turned  over  a  leaf  or  two,  and  might  even  have  had 
their  attention  directed  to  a  few  passages.  The  very  hurry  in  which 
the  thing  was  done,  and  the  fact  that  the  book  was  and  is  compara- 


^  Dr.   Hanipdcii  s  Past  and  Present  Statements   Compared.      By  Dr.   Pusey. 
Oxford  :  Parker.      1836. 

^  Life  of  Dean  Stanley,  vol.  i.  p.  163.     London.     1893. 


BISHOP    WILBERFORCE'S    OPINION  55 

lively  rare,  forbid  the  supposition  that  there  could  have  been  much, 
or  even  an  adequate,  acquaintance  with  its  contents."  ^ 

One  of  those  who  took  a  leading  part  in  opposing  Dr. 
Hampden's  appointment  was  the  Rev.  Samuel  Wilber- 
force,  who  based  his  opposition  on  the  extracts  from  his 
Bampton  Lectures  given  in  Newman's  Elucidations.  It  was 
not  until  Hampden's  appointment  to  the  Bishopric  of 
Hereford,  in  1847,  that  Wilberforce  carefully  read  the 
book  for  himself,  and  then  he  at  once  changed  his  opinions 
on  the  question.  How  this  change  of  opinion  came  about 
is  told,  in  an  interesting  narrative,  by  Newman's  brother, 
Mr.  F.  W.  Newman  : — 

"  My  old  friend,  the  late  Bonamy  Price,  well  known  in  recent 
Oxford,  had  been  a  Rugby  Master,  and  with  Grenfell  and  the  rest 
had  voted  against  disabling  Hampden.  Happening  to  be  in  Oxford 
just  after  the  Bubble  burst  \i.e.  in  1847],  he  called  upon  Dr. 
Hawkins,  who  had  been  gracious  to  him  in  old  days ;  and  inevitably 
the  two  began  mutual  congratulation  on  the  event  \t.e.  Bishop 
Wilberforce's  decision  to  veto  the  proposed  prosecution  of  Hamp- 
den]. Hawkins  was  delighted  and  boiling  over,  and  soon  poured 
out  ample  details  of  what  passed  between  him  and  the  Bishop 
[Samuel  Wilberforce]. 

"  After  the  Bishop  perceived  that  his  old  tutor  looked  grave  on 
the  open  war  against  Crown  Patronage,  and  on  the  rumour  that  the 
Dean  of  Hereford  would  risk  a  Praemunire,  the  Bishop  said  that  to 
listen  to  Keble  was  not  a  new  or  active  deed :  that  in  fact  he  was 
constrained  to  it  [that  is,  to  grant  permission  to  prosecute  Hampden] 
by  consistency ;  for  he  had  voted  against  Hampden's  becoming 
Regius  Professor  of  Divinity,  and  he  could  not  possibly  make  light 
of  unsoundness  concerning  such  a  doctrine  as  the  Trinity.  (These 
two  points  were  the  fulcra  of  the  talk.)  On  the  former,  the 
Provost  said,  'You  voted  in  1836,  true;  but  then  you  were  a  Curate ; 
then  you  were  one  out  of  four  hundred  ;  now  you  are  a  Lord 
Bishop :  then  your  responsibility  was  nil ;  now,  you  will  bring  on 
yourself  the  chief  responsibility.  An  error  here  may  affect  all  your 
future  life.'  When  the  Bishop  made  some  remark  that  for  sacred 
truth  we  must  encounter  great  risk,  he  so  expressed  himself  that 
Hawkins  exclaimed  :  '  Bless  me  !  why,  you  cannot  have  read  Hamp- 
den's lectures ;  you  can  only  have  read  Newman's  Elucidations  of 

^  Mozley's  Reminiscences  of  the  Oxford  Movement,  vol.  i.  pp.  366,  367. 


56  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

them.'  The  Bishop  replied  :  '  Well,  I  must  confess  I  could  not  for 
a  moment  distrust  Newman.'  '  Ah  !  my  Lord,  I  do  not  blame  you ; 
four  hundred  trusted  him,  and  I  have  no  right  to  say,  believe  me 
rather  than  him.  But  since  you  have  not  read  Hampden  yourself, 
and  must  now,  as  Bishop,  seem  to  judge  his  book,  and  to  oppose  his 
appointment  by  the  Crown,  I  do  say,  that  if  you  are  a  wise  Bishop 
you  will  read  his  book  at  once.  And  I  will  tell  you  what !  We 
ought  this  evening  to  sit  side  by  side,  and  read  the  book  together.' 

"  The  Bishop  freely  confessed  the  wisdom  of  the  advice,  and 
acted  on  it.  The  two  sat  together,  with  feet  on  fender,  and  read 
the  lectures  through  from  end  to  end. 

"  Then  the  Bishop  said,  *  My  kind  old  tutor,  you  are  right.  I 
have  no  right  to  open  my  lips  against  Hampden.' 

"  What  actual  words  the  Bishop  next  day  used  to  Keble  I  am 
not  sure  that  I  learned  from  Bonamy,  but  either  from  him  or  from 
some  other  quarter  I  heard  them  to  be  :  '  /  have  now  read  Hampden 
myself^  and  cannot  presume  to  blame  him.'"  ^ 

This  interview  between  Bishop  Wiiberforce  and  Dr. 
Hawkins  took  place,  as  Mr.  F.  W.  Newman  informs  us,  in 
December  1847,  and  the  substantial  accuracy  of  the  story 
of  what  took  place  is  corroborated  by  a  letter  of  Wiiber- 
force himself  to  Hampden,  dated  December  28,  1847,  as 
published  in  his  biography.      In  this  he  wrote  : — 

"  Unless  I  was  satisfied  that  there  was  matter  for  a  criminal  suit, 
I  could  not  think  myself  justified  in  sending  an  accusation  against 
you  to  be  tried  in  the  Arches  Court.  Whether  there  was  such 
matter  could  be  determined  by  me  only  after  a  careful  study  of  the 
works  in  question,  with  all  your  explanations  in  my  mind. 

"  Regarding,  then,  the  Observations  on  Dissent  as  virtually  with- 
drawn, I  accordingly  applied  myself  to  a  thorough  and  impartial  exami- 
nation of  the  'Bampton  Lectures.'  I  have  now  carefully  studied 
them  throughout,  with  the  aid  of  those  explanations  of  their  meaning 
which  you  have  furnished  to  the  public  since  their  first  publication, 
and  now  in  your  private  communications.  The  result  of  this  exami- 
nation, I  am  bound  plainly  to  declare,  is  my  own  conviction  that 
they  do  not  justly  warrant  those  suspicions  of  unsoundness  to  which 
they  have  given  rise,  and  which,  so  long  as  I  trusted  to  selected 
extracts,  I  myself  shared."  ^ 

^  Contributions  Chiefly  to  the  Early  History  of  the  late  Cardinal  Newman. 
By  his  Brother,  F.  W.  Newman.     1891,  pp.  85-88. 
*  Life  of  Bishop  Wiiberforce,  vol.  i,  pp.  486,  487. 


EVANGELICALS    AND    HAMPDEN  57 

Not  only  was  Bishop  Wilberforce  misled  by  Newman's 
Elucidations:  many  Evangelical  Churchmen  also  joined  in 
the  hue  and  cry  against  Hampden,  under  the  impression 
that  he  was  heretical  in  his  teaching  as  to  the  Trinity  and 
the  Incarnation.  But,  after  all,  the  question  here  arises, 
was  there  sufficient  ground  for  these  charges  ?  As  early 
as  February  27,  1836,  Hampden  wrote  to  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury : — "  I  may  be  indulged  on  this  occasion 
with  saying,  that  a  belief  in  the  great  revealed  truths  of 
the  Trinity  and  the  Incarnation  has  been  my  stay  through 
life  ;  and  I  utterly  disclaim  the  imputation  of  inculcating 
any  doctrines  at  variance  with  these  foundations  of  Chris- 
tian hope."  ^  Though  not  holding  heretical  views  on  these 
points  himself,  Hampden  was,  apparently,  willing  to  op- 
pose the  use  of  strong  abuse  against  those  who  really  were 
heretical.  It  was  true  that  he  held  very  liberal  views  as 
to  the  value  of  Confessions  of  Faith  and  Articles  of  Reli- 
gion ;  but,  as  Bishop  Wilberforce  cleverly  showed  in  the 
letter  just  cited,  Newman  himself,  at  about  the  very  time 
when  Hampden's  accused  publications  had  first  appeared, 
was  himself  guilty  of  a  very  similar  offence. 

"  I  read  in  them  [Hampden's  Bampton  Lectures],"  wrote  Wilber- 
force, "  a  thoughtful  and  able  history  of  the  formation  of  dogmatic 
terminology,  not  a  studied  depreciation  of  authorised  dogmatic  lan- 
guage, still  less  any  conscious  denial  of  admitted  dogmatic  truth.  / 
see  in  them,  in  fact,  so  far,  little  more  than  what  has  already  been  ex- 
pressed in  the  words  (never,  I  believe,  considered  liable  to  censure) 
of  one  of  your  ablest  opponents  [Newman]  in  1834,  who  says:  'If  I 
avow  my  belief  that  freedom  from  symbols  and  Articles  is  ab- 
stractedly the  highest  state  of  Church  communion  and  the  peculiar 
knowledge  of  the  Primitive  Church,  it  is  .  .  .  first,  because  techni- 
cality and  formality  are,  in  their  degree,  inevitable  results  of  public 
Confessions  of  Faith.'  And  again  :  '  Her  rulers  were  loth  to  confess 
that  the  Church  had  grown  too  old  to  enjoy  the  free  unsuspicious 
teaching  with  which  her  childhood  was  blest,  and  that  her  dis- 
ciples must  for  the  future  calculate  and  reason  before  they  acted ' 
(Newman's  Arians,  pp.  41,  42)."  2 

^  Memorials  of  Bishop  Haiiipden,  p.  55. 
"^  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  i.  p.  487. 


58  HISTORY    OP^    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

The  fact  is  that  it  is  now  admitted  by  prominent  High 
Churchmen  that  Hampden  was  not,  strictly  speaking, 
heretical  at  all.  That  well-known  High  Churchman,  Lord 
Selborne,  admits  that  : — "  Dr.  Hampden,  as  a  Bishop,  was 
neither  better  nor  worse  than  many  others ;  he  did 
nothing  to  confirm  any  suspicion  of  his  orthodoxy."  ^ 
Archdeacon  Clark  testifies,  "  after  twenty  years'  intimacy  " 
with  Dr.  Hampden,  that : — "  He  was  as  loyal  and  sound 
a  member  of  the  Church  of  England  as  any  of  her  sons ; 
as  orthodox  in  his  views  and  teaching  on  the  doctrines  of 
the  faith  as  it  is  held  by  our  Reformed  Church,  and  ex- 
pressed in  her  Articles  and  formularies,  as  any  who 
belong  to  the  ranks  of  her  ministering  clergy  ;  as  clear 
and  as  sound  in  his  views  and  teaching  on  the  subject  of 
the  Church's  two  Sacraments,  nay,  much  more  so  than 
many  who  thought  it  their  duty  to  attack  him."  ^  The 
testimony  of  the  late  Dean  Church  will,  no  doubt,  carry 
great  weight  with  many  High  Churchmen.  And  this  is 
what  he  says  : — "  Dr.  Hampden  was  in  fact  unexceptionably, 
even  rigidly  orthodox  in  his  acceptance  of  Church  doctrine 
and  Church  Creeds.  He  had  published  a  volume  of 
sermons  containing,  among  other  things,  an  able  state- 
ment of  the  Scriptural  argument  for  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity,  and  an  equally  able  defence  of  the  Athanasian 
Creed."  ^ 

Why,  then,  it  may  be  asked,  was  such  an  ado  made 
about  the  appointment  of  such  a  man  to  the  ofBce  of 
Regius  Professor  of  Divinity  in  1836  ;  and,  again,  to  his 
appointment  as  Bishop  of  Hereford  in  1847?  The  real 
fact  is,  I  believe,  that  the  outcry  against  Hampden  for 
heresy  was  but  the  ostensible  and  not  the  real  cause  of 
the  furious  opposition  of  the  Tractarian  party.  They 
simply  used  this  cry  for  the  purpose  of  blinding  the  eyes 
of  Evangelical  Churchmen,  and  induce  them  to  join  in 
the  hue  and  cry  against  him.  The  real  head  and  front  of 
Dr.    Hampden's   offence  was  his   Protestantism,   and   his 

^  Memorials  Family  and  Personal,  1 766-1865.      By  the  Earl  of  Selborne, 
vol.  ii.  p.  10. 

^  Ale  mortals  of  Bishop  Hampden,  p.  259. 

'  The  Oxford  Movement.     By  Dean  Church,  1st  edition,  p.  144. 


HAMPDEN'S    PROTESTANTISM  59 

well-known  opposition  to  the  sacerdotal  doctrines  of  the 
rising  Tractarian  party,  whom  he  thoroughly  distrusted. 
The  Rev.  William  Sinclair,  who  knew  him  well,  tells  us 
that  (apparently  soon  after  the  commencement  of  the 
Tractarian  Movement) : — "  I  well  remember  seeing  the 
Doctor  come  into  his  study,  flushed  with  excitement  and 
with  a  little  tract  in  his  hand.  It  was  one  of  the  well- 
known  Tracts  for  the  Times.  His  remark  upon  it  was  : 
'These  gentlemen,  without  even  knowing  it,  have  passed 
the  Rubicon ;  they  do  not  see  that  they  are  already 
Romanists.' "  ^ 

Hampden's  Protestantism  was  seen  in  his  Observations 
on  Religious  Dissent,  in  which  he  placed  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures above  every  human  composition,  and  avowed  him- 
self an  opponent  of  the  theory  that  Tradition  is  of  equal 
value  with  the  Bible.  He  wished  to  "  guard  the  depository 
of  sacred  doctrine,  the  Scripture  itself,  against  the  inroads 
of  Tradition,  or  any  human  authority  " ;  and  he  urged  his 
readers  "  to  go  to  Scripture  for  every  matter  of  religious 
debate.  If  the  alleged  point  cannot  be  proved  out  of 
Scripture,  it  is  no  truth  of  revelation."^  In  his  Bampton 
Lectures  Hampden's  opposition  to  the  Sacerdotalism 
which  had  been  adopted  by  the  Tractarian  leaders,  was 
revealed  in  a  most  unmistakable  manner.  He  attributed 
the  "theory  of  Sacramental  influence,"  advocated  in  the 
Scholastic  philosophy,  not  to  Holy  Scripture,  but  to  "  the 
general  belief  in  Magic  in  the  early  ages  of  the  Church."  ^ 

"  The  relative  importance  of  the  Eucharist,"  said  Dr.  Hampden, 
"in  comparison  with  the  other  Sacraments,  and,  indeed,  with  the 
whole  doctrine  and  ritual  of  Christianity,  in  the  system  of  the 
Church  of  Rome,  may  be  drawn  from  this  primary  notion  of 
Sacramental  efficiency.  It  may  well  be  asked,  why  this  sacred  rite 
should  stand  so  pre-eminent  in  the  scheme  of  Christianity.  I  do 
not  say,  that  it  ought  not  to  hold  a  principal  station  among  the 
observances  of  a  holy  life.  But  it  is  the  doctrinal  supremacy  given 
to  it,  to  which  I  refer.  View  it,  as  it  exists  in  the  Roman  Church, 
and  it  is  there  found  absorbing  into  it  the  whole,  it  may  be  said, 

^  Memorials  of  Bishop  Hatnpden,  p.  32. 

^  Observations  on  Religions  Dissent,  2nd  edition,  p.  9. 

*  Hampden's  Scholastic  Philosophy  Considered,  ist  edition,  p.  315. 


6o  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

of  Christian  worship.  There,  the  ministers  of  religion  seem  to  be 
set  apart  chiefly  for  this  sacred  celebration  :  it  is  the  spiritual  power 
of  their  office — the  essence  of  their  priesthood.  If  we  ask  then, 
why  this  particular  Sacrament  should  have  attained  this  superiority 
over  all  other  rites  of  Christianity,  we  may  find  an  answer  in  the 
Scholastic  theory.  Whilst  the  other  Sacraments,  recognised  by 
that  theory,  participate  of  the  virtue  of  Christ's  passion,  this  is  the 
passion  itself  oi  Christ — the  zvhole  virtue  of  His  priesthood  mystically 
represented  and  conveyed.  ...  It  was  freely  admitted  that  Christ 
was  once  offered  for  all  on  the  Cross ;  that  henceforth  He  is  seated 
at  the  right  hand  of  the  Divine  Majesty,  to  die  no  more.  But  the 
sacrifice  performed  by  the  priest  was  still  a  real  offering  of  Christ; 
as  being  the  appointed  channel  through  which  the  expiatory  virtue 
of  the  Great  Sacrifice  descends  in  vital  efflux  from  the  person  of  the 
Saviour.^ 

"  The  history  of  the  Sacraments,  in  the  Scholastic  system,  is, 
God  working  by  the  instrumentality  of  man.  The  theory  is  of  the 
Divine  causation,  but  the  practical  power  displayed  is  the  sacerdotal ; 
the  necessary  instrument  for  the  conveyance  of  Divine  grace  becom- 
ing in  effect  the  principal  cause. 

"Surely  it  requires  no  research  into  ecclesiastical  history  or 
philosophy,  to  see  that  so  operose  a  system  is  utterly  repugnant  to 
the  spirit  of  Christianity.  Contemplate  our  Saviour  at  the  Last 
Supper,  breaking  bread,  and  giving  thanks,  and  distributing  to  His 
disciples ;  and  how  great  is  the  transition  from  the  institution  itself 
to  the  splendid  ceremonial  of  the  Latin  Church?  Hear  Him,  or 
His  Apostles,  exhorting  to  repentance  ;  and  can  we  suppose  the 
casuistical  system,  to  which  the  name  of  Penance  has  been  given, 
to  be  the  true  sacrifice  of  the  broken  and  contrite  spirit  ?  .  .  . 

"Thanks  to  the  Christian  resolution  of  our  Reformers,  they 
broke  that  charm  which  this  mystical  number  of  the  Sacraments 
carried  with  it,  and  dispelled  the  theurgic  system  which  it  supported. 
We  are  not,  perhaps,  sufficiently  sensible  of  the  advantages  which 
we  enjoy  through  their  exertions  in  this  respect — exertions  which 
cost  them  so  many  painful  struggles,  even  to  the  bitterness  of  death. 
They  have  taken  our  souls  out  of  the  hand  of  man,  to  let  them 
repose  in  the  bosom  of  our  Saviour  and  our  God.  We  have  been 
enabled  thus  to  fulfil  the  instruction  of  Scripture,  to  'come  boldly 
to  the  throne  of  Grace,'  and  ask  of  Him  who  gives  liberally  and 
denies  to  none.  The  perplexities  and  distress  of  heart,  of  which  we 
have  been  relieved,  none  perhaps  can  now  adequately  conceive. 

^  Hampden's  Scholastic  Philosophy  Considered,  pp.  321,  322. 


TRACTARIAN    ATTACK    ON    HAMPDEN  6 1 

We  must  ask  of  those  who  have  experienced  the  false  comfort  of 
that  officious  intercession  of  the  Sacramental  system  of  the  Latin 
Church.  They  will  tell  us  that,  under  that  system,  they  knew  not 
the  liberty  of  the  Gospel.  They  were  unhappy  without  resource. 
Their  wounds  were  opened,  but  there  was  none  to  heal."  ^ 

In  statements  such  as  these  we  find,  I  believe,  the 
real  cause  of  the  Tractarian  attack  on  Dr.  Hampden. 
Latitudinarian  views  as  to  Holy  Scripture  are  now  very 
common  and  widespread  amongst  a  certain  section  of 
the  Ritualistic  party.  Their  zeal  now,  as  was  that  of 
their  predecessors  in  1836,  is  mainly  directed  to  build- 
ing up  that  sacerdotal  system  against  which  our  Re- 
formers testified  with  their  blood.  Hampden  protested 
against  the  same  evil  system  ;  hence  the  hatred  of  Pusey, 
Newman,  Keble,  and  others,  who  made  the  life  of  their 
opponent  unhappy  for  many  years.  In  saying  this  I 
wish  to  guard  myself  against  being  supposed  to  be  a 
friend  to  Hampden's  Latitudinarian  views.  I  have  no 
sympathy  with  them  whatever,  and  I  think  that  Lord 
Melbourne  in  1836,  and  Lord  John  Russell  in  1847, 
would  have  acted  more  wisely  had  they  selected  some 
one  else  who  valued  Christian  doctrines  more  highly  than 
did  Dr.  Hampden. 

We  now  return  to  the  history  of  the  case.  The 
appointment  of  Hampden  as  Regius  Professor  of  Divinity 
was  published  in  the  London  Gazette  on  February  17, 
1836,  and  after  that  it  was  felt  by  his  opponents  that 
there  was  no  chance  of  upsetting  it.  But  it  was  pos- 
sible to  move  the  University  to  express  its  disapproval 
of  the  appointment.  The  first  attempt  in  this  direction 
proved,  as  I  have  already  stated,  a  decided  failure  owing 
to  the  firm  action  of  Hampden  himself.  But  the  effort 
could  be  renewed,  and  it  was  renewed.  At  last  the 
Heads  of  Houses  decided,  though  with  not  a  little  hesi- 
tation, that  they  would  bring  before  Convocation  a  new 
statute,  providing  that  Dr.  Hampden  should  not  (like  his 
predecessors  in  office)  be  placed  on  the  Board  which 
nominated   select   preachers    before  the   University ;    and 

^  Hampden's  Scholastic  Philosophy  Considered,  pp.  341-343. 


62  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

that  he  should  not  be  consulted  when  a  sermon  was 
called  in  question  before  the  Vice-Chancellor.  The  Con- 
vocation was  to  meet  to  decide  this  important  matter 
on  March  22nd,  and  in  preparation  for  it  Pusey  issued 
a  pamphlet  entitled  :  Dr.  Hampden's  Theological  Statements 
and  the  Thhiy-Nine  Aiiicles  Compared.  It  contained  extracts 
from  Hampden's  writings.  Every  effort  was  made  to 
bring  up  voters  from  the  country,  and  with  the  result 
that  on  the  eventful  day  about  450  members  were  present. 
But  they  came  up  in  vain,  for  no  sooner  had  the  Vice- 
Chancellor  put  the  question  of  the  proposed  new  statute, 
than  the  Proctors  interposed  with  their  veto,  which  at 
once  put  an  end  to  the  proceedings.  The  Tractarians 
were,  of  course,  very  much  vexed,  but  they  certainly  had 
subsequently  an  ample  revenge,  when,  in  1 844,  a  proposal 
to  censure  Tract  XC.  was,  in  the  interests  of  the  Tractarians, 
vetoed  by  the  then  Proctors,  Mr.  Church  and  Mr.  Guille- 
mard.  The  names  of  the  Proctors  who  vetoed  the 
proposed  statute  against  Dr.  Hampden  should  here  be 
mentioned.  They  were  the  Rev.  E.  G.  Bayly,  Fellow  of 
Pembroke  College  ;  and  the  Rev.  Henry  Reynolds,  Fellow 
and  Tutor  of  Jesus  College.  Though  defeated  on  this 
occasion  the  opponents  of  Hampden  did  not  lose  hope. 
They  knew  that  new  Proctors  would  soon  be  appointed. 
This  was  done  on  April  13th.  In  that  month  appeared 
Dr.  Arnold's  famous  article  in  the  Edinburgh  Review,  on 
"  The  Oxford  Malignants  and  Dr.  Hampden,"  which,  by 
the  strength  of  its  denunciations  of  the  Tractarians  fanned 
the  flame  to  fiercer  heat  than  ever.  The  Convocation  met 
again  on  May  5th  :  the  vetoed  statute  was  again  introduced. 
Its  adoption  was  moved  by  Dr.  Cardwell,  Principal  of  St. 
Albans  Hall ;  and  seconded  by  Dr.  Symons,  Warden  of 
Wadham  ;  the  latter  being  an  opponent  of  Tractarianism. 
It  was  carried  by  474  votes  for,  and  94  against,  being  a 
majority  of  380.     The  statute  was  in  the  following  terms  : 

"  Since  it  is  committed  by  the  University  to  the  Regius  Professor 
of  Sacred  Theology  that  he  shall  be  one  of  the  number  of  those  by 
whom  the  select  preachers  are  appointed,  and,  moreover,  that  his 
advice  shall  be  had  if  any  preacher  shall  be  called  in  question  before 


THE    CASE    IN    THE    HOUSE    OF    LORDS  63 

the  Chancellor ;  but  since  he,  who  is  now  the  Professor,  in  certain  of 
his  pubhshed  works  has  so  treated  theological  questions,  that  in  this 
behalf  the  University  has  no  confidence  in  him ;  it  is  enacted  that 
the  Regius  Professor  shall  be  deprived  of  the  aforesaid  functions 
until  the  pleasure  of  the  University  be  otherwise.  Sic."  ^ 

This  statute  was  a  sting  for  Dr.  Hampden,  but  it  did 
not  lead  to  his  removal  from  office,  and  therefore  in  the 
contest  he  became  the  substantial  victor.  Three  eminent 
lawyers  were  consulted  as  to  its  legality.  Their  decision 
was  given  in  these  terms  : — "  We  think  the  statute  of  1836 
is  illegal,  as  violating  the  restrictions  imposed  by  the 
Laudian  Code,  and  as  passed  by  the  assumption  and 
exercise  of  a  power  which  has  not  been  conceded  to  the 
University."  ^  There  were,  even  amongst  the  leading 
opponents  of  Hampden,  some  who  thought  the  statute 
illegal.  The  Rev.  Thomas  Mozley  was  one  of  these.  He 
denounced  it  as  an  "  audacious  act,"  and  declared  that : — 
"Any  reasonable  person,  too,  may  doubt  the  validity  of 
an  act  depriving  the  Regius  Professor  of  Divinity  of 
privileges  appertaining  to  the  very  essence  of  the  office. 
If  he  is  not  to  have  a  vote  in  the  selection  of  University 
preachers,  or  upon  a  charge  of  heresy,  where  is  he  ?  "  ^ 

On  December  21,  1837,  ^^e  case  of  Dr.  Hampden 
was  debated  in  the  House  of  Lords,  in  the  course  of  a 
discussion  on  University  Reform.  The  Earl  of  Radnor 
warmly  defended  the  Professor,  and  said  that  he  had  no 
doubt  that  all  the  hostility  to  him  arose  from  his  advocat- 
ing the  admission  of  Dissenters  into  the  University.  Lord 
Melbourne  said  : — "  I  certainly  do  not  think  that  there  is 
anything  to  be  condemned  in  the  writings  of  Dr.  Hamp- 
den." The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  attacked  Dr.  Hamp- 
den in  such  a  very  marked  manner  that  he  felt  it  necessary 
to  defend  himself  in  a  lengthy  letter  to  his  Grace,  in  which 
he  demanded  to  know  what  were  the  actual  charges  brought 
against  him  by  his  accusers,  and  also  that  he  should  not 
be  judged  by  mere  clamour  and  shouting,  but  by  proper 

^  Lt/e  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  i.  p.  425. 

^  Memorials  of  Bishop  Hampden,  p.  65. 

^  Mozley's  Reminiscences  of  the  Oxford  Movement,  vol.  i.  p.  364. 


64  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

ecclesiastical    judges ;    and    he    concluded    by   a    fearless 
exposure  of  the  real  motives  of  his  chief  opponents. 

"  I  implore  your  Grace,"  he  wrote,  "effectually  to  put  an  end  to 
this  unnatural  warfare.  I  ask,  as  I  have  said,  for  specific  charges, 
if  such  exist.  I  ask  to  be  called  to  account  before  a  legal  ecclesias- 
tical tribunal,  if  there  be  real  matter  of  accusation  against  me.  .  .  . 
It  is  also  well  known,  that  among  the  prime  movers  of  the  disturb- 
ance were  the  leaders  and  disciples  of  a  new  theological  school, 
which  is  now  attracting  notice  by  its  extraordinary  publications,  and 
exciting  considerable  alarm  in  the  Church.  Am  I  to  satisfy  this 
party  ?  Am  I  to  purchase  exemption  from  censure  by  folding  my 
arms,  and  suffering  myself  to  be  led  away  captive  by  a  band  whom  I 
regard  as  making  inroads  on  the  constitution  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land ?  You  would  not,  my  Lord,  have  me  to  consent  to  such  terms 
of  peace.  ...  If,  indeed,  the  price  of  quiet  is  to  be  a  surrender  of 
the  name  and  principles  of  Protestantism — if  I  am  to  admit  the 
authority  of  Tradition  on  a  parity  with  Scripture — if  the  profession 
of  Justification  by  Faith  only  is  no  longer  to  be  the  sign  of  a  stand- 
ing Church,  but  a  doctrine  of  Episcopal  Grace  and  Sacramental 
Justification  is  to  overlay  God's  free  pardon  through  Christ  to  sinful 
men — if  private  judgment  is  to  be  restrained,  not  by  appeal  to 
Scripture  and  argument,  but  by  intimidation — if  self-constituted 
associations  and  the  names  of  men  are  to  rule  questions  of  theology 
— if  Dissent  is  to  be  called  sin  ;  and  taking  of  oaths,  piety  ;  and 
mysticism,  religion ;  and  superstition,  faith ;  and  Antichrist,  Christ — 
then  there  is  no  alternative  but  that  I  must  be  objected  against  by 
those  who  hold  what,  if  I  read  the  Gospel  aright,  are  the  most  serious 
perversions  of  its  truth  and  its  spirit."  ^ 

In  1842  the  Heads  of  Houses  at  Oxford  formed  a  new 
Theological  Board  of  Examiners,  and  actually  appointed 
Dr.  Hampden  as  its  Chairman.  This  was,  of  course,  prac- 
tically a  withdrawal  of  the  censure  passed  upon  him  in 
1836,  and,  curiously  enough,  the  appointment  did  not 
evoke  any  public  opposition  ;  but  when  the  Heads  of 
Houses  decided  to  go  further,  and,  at  the  next  meeting 
of  Convocation,  to  formally  remove  the  statute  of  1836, 
the  Tractarians  took  alarm  at  once,  and  again  set  to  work 
to  whip  up  their  friends  to  vote  against  the  proposal. 
This  time,  however,  they  had  to  lament  the  coldness  of 

1  Memorials  of  Bishop  Hampden,  pp.  no,  iii. 


THE    CASE    OF   THE    REV.    R.    G.    MACMULLEN  65 

those  Evangelicals  who  had  helped  them  in  1836.  A  few 
days  before  the  question  came  on  for  decision,  Dr.  Pusey 
wrote  despondingly  to  Keble  : — "  I  fear  there  is  increasing 
ground  for  anxiety  ;  the  Low  Church  keeps  aloof ;  the 
Standard  has  begun  the  Anti-Newman  cry."  ^  Archdeacon 
Samuel  Wilberforce,  who  had  voted  for  the  statute  of 
1836,  was  strongly  inclined  to  vote  against  rescinding  it  ; 
but  he  had  his  doubts  on  the  point,  which  seem  to  have 
prevented  him  from  voting  either  for  or  against  it.  ''  My 
principal  doubt,"  he  said,  '<  is  this — by  an  unopposed  statute 
Hampden  was  made  Chairman  of  the  new  Theological 
Board  ;  now,  how  can  we  refuse  him  one  voice  amongst 
five  in  nominating  select  preachers  on  the  disqualification 
of  heresy,  and  yet  allow  him  to  be  Chairman  of  this 
Theological  Board  ?  It  is  not  so  much  the  absolute  con- 
tradiction of  this,  as  the  look  of  party  which  it  wears,  that 
moves  me."  ^  On  June  yth,  the  proposition  of  the  Heads 
of  Houses  was  discussed  in  Convocation,  and  rejected  by 
334  to  219,  a  majority  for  Hampden's  opponents  of  115. 
The  voting  showed  unmistakably  that  the  opposition  to 
Hampden  was  considerably  less  than  in  1836,  when  the 
statute  of  censure  was  passed  by  a  majority  of  380.  ''The 
Convocation  of  the  University,"  in  Canon  Liddon's  opinion, 
"  saved  its  consistency  ;  but  the  diminished  majority 
showed  that  recent  alarms,  and  perhaps  Dr.  Hampden's 
appeals  to  the  popular  Protestantism,  had  not  been  with- 
out effect."  ^ 

In  1842  a  considerable  amount  of  public  interest  cen- 
tred round  a  case  with  which  Dr.  Hampden  had  to  deal 
as  Regius  Professor  of  Divinity.  The  Rev.  Richard  Gell 
Macmullen,  Fellow  of  Corpus  Christi  College,  was  required 
by  the  statutes  of  his  College  to  take  his  B.D.  degree,  if 
he  wished  to  retain  his  Fellowship.  It  appears  to  have 
been  the  custom,  under  such  circumstances,  for  the  appli- 
cant to  defend  two  theses  given  to  him  by  the  Regius 
Professor    of    Divinity.       Accordingly,    Mr.    Macmullen 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  2S9. 

^  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  i.  p.  218. 

*  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  290. 


66  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

applied  to  Dr.  Hampden  to  give  him  two  theses  to  defend. 
It  was  very  well  known  to  the  Professor  and  in  the  Uni- 
versity that  Mr.  Macmullen  was  a  Tractarian  of  a  very 
pronounced  type.  Probably  as  a  test  of  his  soundness  in 
the  faith,  Dr.  Hampden  gave  him  the  following  theses  to 
defend  : — 

"  I.  The  Church  of  England  does  not  teach,  nor  can  it  be  proved 
from  Scripture  that  any  change  takes  place  in  the  Elements  at 
Consecration  in  the  Lord's  Supper." 

"  2.  It  is  a  mode  of  expression  calculated  to  give  erroneous 
views  of  Divine  Revelation  to  speak  of  Scripture  and  Catholic 
Tradition  as  joint  authorities  in  the  matter  of  Christian  Doctrine." 

Mr.  Macmullen  refused  to  defend  these  theses,  and 
demanded,  as  of  right,  that  he  should  select  his  own  in- 
stead. Dr.  Hampden  refused  to  grant  the  demand,  and 
with  the  result  that  Mr.  Macmullen  appealed  to  the  law, 
which  ultimately  led  to  his  defeat,  with  costs.  Dr. 
Hampden  having  thus  gained  the  victory,  Mr.  Macmullen 
gave  way,  and  consented  to  read  his  exercises  for  the  B.D. 
degree  from  the  original  theses  submitted  to  him  about 
two  years  before.  He  read  them  on  April  i8  and  19, 1844, 
in  the  Divinity  School.^  They  were  afterwards  published 
in  pamphlet  form  ;  ^  but  instead  of  defending  the  theses,  he 
really  did  his  best  to  upset  them  by  a  series  of  Jesuitical 
arguments.  He  said  :  "  It  will  therefore  be  my  object  to 
endeavour  to  establish  in  the  first  place.  That  the  Church 
of  England  does  teach  or  imply  that  some  change  takes 
place  in  the  Elements  at  Consecration  "  ;  and  he  actually 
declared  that  "The  very  order  and  rite  of  Consecration 
itself  in  our  Book  of  Common  Prayer  is  a  presumption  in 
favour  of  the  view  that  the  Church  of  England  does  teach 
that  the  Sacramental  Elements  are  themselves  changed  into 
the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ."  ^  In  his  exercise  on  the 
second  thesis  Mr.  Macmullen  attacked  the  Protestant 
doctrine    of     Private    Judgment     in     vigorous     language. 

^  Browne's  Annals  of  the  Tractarian  Movement^  3rd  edition,  pp.  570,  571. 
*  Two  Exercises  for  the  Deg7-ee  of  B.D.      By  Richard  Cell  Macmullen,  M.A. 
Oxford:  Parker.     1844. 
3  Ibid.  pp.  6,  7. 


REMONSTRANCE    OF   THIRTEEN    BISHOPS  67 

"The  statement  of  our  Church,"  he  said,  "That  'Holy 
Scripture  containeth  all  things  necessary  to  salvation,'  does 
not  mean  that  it  can  possibly  be  the  duty,  much  less,  as  is 
often  proudly  and  profanely  said,  the  right  of  every  man  to 
go  to  Scripture  to  gather  out  his  own  system  of  opinion 
for  himself,  to  receive  no  doctrine,  to  believe  no  truth,  but 
what  he  sees  to  be  declared  therein."  ^  Dr.  Hampden 
expressed  himself  as  dissatisfied  with  the  exercises,  but, 
as  Dean  Church  expresses  it,  "  Somehow  or  other,  Mr. 
Macmullen  at  last  got  his  degree."  Within  about  two 
years  from  doing  so  he  seceded  to  the  Church  of  Rome. 

Towards  the  end  of  1847,  Lord  John  Russell  startled 
the  country  by  nominating  Dr.  Hampden  to  the  Bishopric 
of  Hereford.  It  was  a  most  injudicious  measure,  since  it 
could  not  be  said  that  there  was  no  other  suitable  man  for 
the  post  in  the  country,  whose  appointment  would  not 
have  caused  such  a  violent  agitation  as  now  arose.  The 
opposition  was  fiercer  and  more  widespread  than  in  1836. 
Even  the  Bishops  took  alarm,  and  thirteen  of  them  signed 
a  united  remonstrance  to  Lord  John  Russell,  which,  be- 
cause of  its  importance,  I  print  here  entire  : — 

"My  Lord, — We,  the  undersigned  Bishops  of  the  Church  of 
England,  feel  it  our  duty  to  represent  to  your  lordship,  as  head  of 
her  Majesty's  Government,  the  apprehension  and  alarm  which  have 
been  excited  in  the  minds  of  the  clergy  by  the  rumoured  nomination 
to  the  See  of  Hereford  of  Dr.  Hampden,  in  the  soundness  of  whose 
doctrine  the  University  of  Oxford  has  affirmed,  by  a  solemn  decree, 
its  want  of  confidence. 

"  We  are  persuaded  that  your  lordship  does  not  know  how  deep 
and  general  a  feeling  prevails  on  this  subject,  and  we  consider  our- 
selves to  be  acting  only  in  the  discharge  of  our  bounden  duty  both 
to  the  Crown  and  the  Church,  when  we  respectfully  but  earnestly 
express  to  your  lordship  our  conviction  that,  if  this  appointment  be 
completed,  there  is  the  greatest  danger  both  of  the  interruption  of  the 
peace  of  the  Church,  and  of  the  disturbance  of  that  confidence  which 
it  is  most  desirable  that  the  clergy  and  laity  of  the  Church  should 
feel  in  every  exercise  of  the  Royal  Supremacy,  especially  as  regards 
that  very  delicate  and  important  particular,  the  nomination  to  vacant 

^  MacmuUen's  Two  Exercises  for  the  Degree  of  B.D.,  p.  58. 


68  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

sees.      We  have  the  honour  to  be,  my  Lord,  with  sincere  respect, 
your  lordship's  obedient  and  faithful  servants,  &c.,  &c." 

It  was  the  first  time  since  the  Reformation  that  such  a 
protest  against  an  Episcopal  appointment  had  been  made 
by  so  large  a  number  of  Bishops,  and  there  were  high 
hopes  held  by  some  that  it  would  be  effectual  in  preventing 
the  consecration  of  Dr.  Hampden.  But  such  hopes  were 
doomed  to  disappointment.  On  November  26,  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury  wrote  to  the  Prime  Minister  to 
apprise  him  "  of  the  extent  and  intensity  of  the  feeling " 
against  the  appointment ;  to  whom  Lord  John  Russell 
replied  on  the  following  day,  attributing  the  opposition 
mainly  to  Mr.  Newman's  disciples,  and  giving  them  a  well- 
merited  censure : — 

"I  am  sorry,"  he  wrote,  "to  find  from  your  Grace's  letter  that 
the  outcry  has  been  greater  than  you  expected.  I  must  attribute 
it  chiefly  to  that  portion  of  the  clergy  who  share  Mr.  Newman's 
opinions,  but  have  not  had  the  honesty  to  follow  Mr.  Newman  in  his 
change  of  profession. 

"  I  confess  I  am  not  surprised  that  such  persons  should  dread 
to  see  a  man  on  the  Bench  who  will  actively  maintain  Protestant 
doctrines.  So  long  as  a  Bishop  is  silent  and  winks  at  their  attempts 
to  give  a  Roman  Catholic  character  to  the  Church  of  England,  they 
are  not  alarmed ;  but  when  they  see  a  man  promoted  who  has 
learning  to  detect  and  energy  to  denounce  their  errors,  they  begin 
to  fear  that  Confessions,  and  Rosaries,  and  Articles  taken  in  a  non- 
natural  sense,  and  Monkish  Legends  of  Saints,  will  be  discouraged 
and  exposed."  ^ 

In  reply  to  the  remonstrance  of  the  thirteen  Bishops, 
the  Prime  Minister  wrote  : — 

'•  I  observe  that  your  lordships  do  not  state  any  want  of  con- 
fidence on  your  part  in  Ihe  soundness  of  Dr.  Hampden's  doctrines. 
Your  lordships  refer  me  to  a  decree  of  the  University  of  Oxford, 
passed  eleven  years  ago,  and  founded  on  lectures  delivered  fifteen 
years  ago. 

"  Since  the  date  of  that  decree,  Dr.  Hampden  has  acted  as 
Regius  Professor  of  Divinity  in  the  University  of  Oxford,  and  many 

^  Life  of  Lord  John  Russell.  By  Spencer  Walpole,  edition  1891,  vol.  i. 
P-  495- 


ARCHDEACON  HARE'S  PAMPHLET  69 

Bishops,  as  I  am  told,  have  required  certificates  of  attendance  on 
his  lectures  before  they  have  proceeded  to  ordain  candidates  who 
had  received  their  education  at  Oxford.  He  has  likewise  preached 
sermons,  for  which  he  has  been  honoured  with  the  approbation  of 
several  prelates  of  our  Church.  Several  months  before  I  named 
Dr.  Hampden  to  the  Queen  for  the  See  of  Hereford,  I  signified 
my  intention  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  did  not  receive 
from  him  any  discouragement. 

"  In  these  circumstances,  it  appears  to  me  that,  should  I  with- 
draw my  recommendation  from  Dr.  Hampden,  which  has  been 
sanctioned  by  the  Queen,  I  should  virtually  assent  to  the  doctrine 
that  a  decree  of  the  University  of  Oxford  is  a  perpetual  bar  of 
exclusion  against  a  clergyman  of  eminent  learning  and  unimpeach- 
able life ;  and  that,  in  fact,  the  supremacy  which  is  now  vested  in 
the  Crown,  is  to  be  transferred  to  a  majority  of  the  members  of  one 
of  our  Universities. 

"  Nor  should  it  be  forgotten  that  many  of  the  most  prominent 
among  that  majority  have  since  joined  the  communion  of  the  See 
of  Rome. 

"I  deeply  regret  the  feeling  which  is  said  to  be  common  among 
the  clergy  on  this  subject.  But  I  cannot  sacrifice  the  reputation  of 
Dr.  Hampden,  the  rights  of  the  Crown,  and  what  I  believe  to  be 
the  true  interests  of  the  Church,  to  a  feeling  which  I  believe  to  be 
founded  on  misapprehension  and  fomented  by  prejudice." 

Meetings  of  the  clergy  to  protest  against  the  appoint- 
ment of  Dr.  Hampden  were  organised  in  various  parts 
of  the  country.  At  these  gatherings  many  strong  protests 
against  the  agitation  were  heard.  The  Venerable  Julius 
Charles  Hare,  Archdeacon  of  Lewes,  was  asked  to  con- 
vene a  meeting  of  the  clergy  of  his  Archdeaconry  to 
protest  against  the  appointment.  This  request  led  him, 
for  the  first  time,  to  make  a  careful  examination  of 
Hampden's  writings,  and  with  the  result  that  he  not  only 
refused  to  call  such  a  meeting,  but  also  published  a 
pamphlet  on  the  subject,  in  which  he  gave  his  reasons 
for  believing  that  Hampden  was  not  a  teacher  of  heresy. 
In  this  pamphlet  the  Archdeacon  stated  that  on  first 
hearing  of  the  appointment  he  had  at  once  condemned 
it  as  "  an  act  of  folly  almost  amounting   to   madness."  ^ 

^  A  Letter  to  the  Dean  of  Chichester  on  the  Agitation  Excited  by  the  Appoint- 
ment of  Dr.  Hampden.  By  Julius  Charles  Hare,  Archdeacon  of  Lewes,  p.  6. 
London:  Parker.     184S. 


70  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Of  "  Dr.  Hampden  personally,"  he  added,  "  I  know 
nothing,  and  ten  days  ago  had  never  read  a  word  of 
his  writings,"  ^  but  that,  having  now  read  them,  he  believed 
that  "  Clamour  on  the  part  of  the  accusers,  Ignorance 
on  that  of  their  hearers — in  which  it  is  to  be  hoped  that 
the  accusers  themselves  have  no  small  share^ — these  are 
the  powers  relied  on  to  bar  his  way  to  the  Episcopate, 
the  two  uncouth,  unwieldy  giants  that  throw  their  clubs 
across  his  path."^  In  1836  Hampden's  opponents 
circulated  privately  a  pamphlet  of  fifteen  pages,  without 
any  title  on  the  outside.  On  page  7  commenced  a 
section  headed,  *'  Propositions  Maintained  in  Dr.  Hamp- 
den's Works,"  followed  by  a  classified  set  of  extracts, 
far  more  unfair  than  those  given  by  Newman  in  his 
notorious  Elucidations.  They  were  reprinted  in  1842, 
and  circulated  privately  for  a  third  time  in  1847,  with 
no  author's  name  attached.  Archdeacon  Hare  reprinted 
the  whole  of  these  extracts,  and  then  tested  them  by  the 
original  documents,  proving  their  dishonest  character 
thoroughly,   and  concluding  thus  : — 

"  Here  at  length  we  may  pass  out  of  this  valley  of  death.  There 
are  still  three  or  four  Propositions  that  I  have  not  noticed  ;  but  they 
seem  to  be  merely  stuck  in  to  swell  out  the  list,  and,  after  what  has 
already  been  said,  need  no  examination.  Such  a  collection  of 
fraudulent  misrepresentations  has  hardly  ever  come  under  my 
notice,  though  I  have  had  much  sad  experience  in  this  way ;  and 
it  has  been  a  painful  task  to  expose  them.  But,  as  I  have  had  to 
say  on  a  former  occasion,  a  lying  spirit  is  stalking  through  our 
Church,  and  even  taking  possession  of  some  minds  that  would  other- 
wise be  among  its  pillars  and  noblest  ornaments  :  and  this  spirit  we 
must  endeavour  to  cast  out  at  whatsoever  cost.  Who  the  collector 
of  this  series  of  Propositions  may  be,  I  know  not.  Most  probably 
he  will  be  found  among  those  whose  love  of  truth  has  sought  a 
congenial  resting-place  in  the  Romish  schism  ;  and  his  natural  end 
seems  to  be,  unless  some  higher  spirit  arrest  him,  to  become  a 
Familiar  of  the  Inquisition."  ^ 

There  were  but  very  few  of  the  clergy  who  took  the 
trouble  of  imitating  the  excellent  example  of  Archdeacon 

^  Hare's  Letter  to  the  Dean  of  Chichester,  p.  6l. 
"^  Ibid,  p.  23,  3  /^j-^_  pp_  ^3^  jg 


PROPOSED  PROSECUTION  OF  HAMPDEN       7 1 

Hare  and  studying  Hampden's  writings  for  themselves. 
Almost  in  every  instance  they  formed  their  opinions  of 
the  merits  of  the  case  from  Newman's  Elucidations,  and 
that  set  of  "  Propositions "  which  raised  the  just  in- 
dignation of  Archdeacon  Hare.  Stanley,  who  was  by 
no  means  favourably  disposed  towards  Hampden,  "  was," 
his  biographer  states,  "  especially  struck  by  the  injustice 
of  condemning  a  man  for  writings  which  his  accusers 
had  probably  not  read,  and  certainly  had  not  studied." 
While  the  excitement  about  the  Hereford  Bishopric  case 
was  at  its  height,  Stanley  wrote  :  "  The  Dean  of  Norwich 
told  me  to-day  that  Murray  had  told  him  that  not  one 
copy  of  Hampden's  Bampton  Lectures  had  been  sold 
since  these  disturbances  had  begun.  '  Not  one  copy  1 ' 
I  exclaimed,  perfectly  boiling  with  indignation.  *  What ! 
not  one  amongst  the  thousands  of  the  clergy,  who  are 
petitioning  or  clamouring  against  his  appointment,  has 
had  the  conscience  to  buy  his  book  ?  I  never  heard 
anything  so  disgraceful.'  "  ^ 

It  cannot  be  doubted  that  a  large  number  of  the 
clergy  who  had  no  sympathy  with  Tractarianism,  or,  as  it 
was  then  termed,  Puseyism,  took  part  in  the  agitation 
against  Hampden  ;  but  the  real  wire-pullers  and  chief 
organisers  of  the  opposition,  from  first  to  last,  were  the 
Tractarians.  On  the  very  day  that  Hampden's  appoint- 
ment was  announced  Pusey  wrote  to  the  Rev.  B.  Harrison, 
suggesting  that  "  his  elevation  to  the  Episcopate  might  be 
hindered  at  Bow  Church,"  '^  that  is,  by  a  formal  protest 
at  his  confirmation.  Eight  days  later,  on  November  23rd, 
he  announced  to  Archdeacon  Churton :  "He  will  be 
opposed  at  Bow  Church,  if  by  no  others,  by  J.  Keble."  ^ 
Hampden,  by  virtue  of  his  office  as  Regius  Professor  of 
Divinity,  was  also  Rector  of  Ewelme,  in  the  Diocese  of 
Oxford,  a  living  attached  officially  to  the  Professorship. 
Here  was  a  further  opening  for  attack  on  the  part  of  his 
opponents.  It  was  seen  that  while  it  would  be  very 
difficult  to  prosecute  Hampden  for  heresy  as  a  Professor,  it 

^  Life  of  Dean  Stanley,  vol.  i.  p.  349. 
^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  iii.  p.  159. 
3  Ibid.  p.  160. 


72  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

would  be  comparatively  easy  to  do  so,  as  a  Rector.  "  There- 
upon," says  Canon  Liddon,  "  Pusey  and  Keble  set  to  work 
to  draw  up  articles  for  the  '  oppositores '  in  Bow  Church, 
and,  following  the  advice  of  Dr.  Addams  and  Dr.  Harding, 
and  of  Keble's  proctor,  Mr.  Townsend,  they  endeavoured 
to  institute  a  suit  against  Hampden  in  the  Ecclesiastical 
Courts.  .  .  .  Mr.  Townsend  visited  Oxford  in  order  to 
talk  over  the  matter  with  Pusey,  Marriott,  and  J.  B. 
Mozley.  Mr.  Marriott  then  applied  to  the  Bishop  of 
Oxford  for  Letters  of  Request,  by  which  the  case  would 
be  transferred  to  the  Court  of  Arches."^  The  four  chief 
workers  in  the  protest  at  Bow  Church,  and  especially  in 
the  organising  of  the  proposed  prosecution,  were  Keble, 
Pusey,  Marriott,  and  J.  B.  Mozley,  all  leaders  of  the 
Tractarian  party,  by  whom  they  were  in  every  respect 
thoroughly  trusted.  But  these  gentlemen,  though  the 
real  wire-pullers  of  the  prosecution,  do  not  appear  to 
have  actually  given  their  names  as  formal  prosecutors, 
and  it  was  not  until  Dr.  Hampden  had  demanded 
from  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  the  names  of  his  accusers 
that  he  received  them  from  the  Bishop.  They  were 
the  Revs.  W.  H.  Ridley,  E.  Dean,  and  H.  J.  Young.^ 
Canon  Liddon  informs  us  that  "  Keble  characteristically 
made  himself  responsible  for  the  legal  expenses,  which 
Badeley  estimated  at  ^2000.  There  is  no  doubt  that 
Pusey  did  not  allow  the  burden  to  fall  on  him  alone. 
<  Keble,'  wrote  Badeley  to  Pusey  on  January  21,  1848, 
'  has  sent  me  the  guaranty  for  the  costs  signed  by  himself 
only  ;  do  you  know  of  any  others  who  would  be  willing 
to  join  with  him?'  The  object  was  that  'the  expenses 
should  not  fall  on  those  who  were  put  forward  as  the  nominal 
objectors.'  "  ^  It  thus  appears  wlio  the  real  prosecutors  were. 
What  the  theological  opinions  of  the  nominal  prosecutors 
were  I  have  no  means  of  knowing.  I  cannot  tell  whether 
they  were  High  Churchmen  or  Evangelicals. 

Bishop   Samuel  Wilberforce   lost  no   time  in  dealing 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pzisey,  vol.  iii.  p.  i6i. 

^  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  i.  p.  466. 

3  LJfe  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  iii.  p.  161,  note. 


QUESTIONS    FOR    DR.    HAMPDEN  73 

with  the  request  of  the  Tractarian  leaders  to  send  the  case 
on  for  trial  before  the  Court  of  Arches.  At  first  he  was 
in  favour  of  the  prosecution,  and  on  December  i6th  he 
actually  signed  the  Letters  of  Request  to  the  Court  of 
Arches,  which,  however,  he  subsequently  withdrew.  But, 
before  withdrawing  them,  he  induced  the  promoters  of 
the  suit — I  quote  the  language  of  Bishop  Wilberforce's 
biographer — "to  consent  to  the  withdrawal  of  the  'Letters' 
if  he  could  induce  Dr.  Hampden  to  give  satisfactory  as- 
surances as  to  some  of  the  points  on  which  the  language 
of  the  Bampton  Lectures  and  the  Obscrvatio)is  on  Religions 
Dissent  was  most  disquieting."  ^  Accordingly  the  Bishop 
wrote  to  Hampden,  on  December  17th,  asking  him  to  give 
to  the  Church  "  such  a  distinct  avowal  on  your  part  of 
sound  doctrine,  and  such  a  withdrawal  of  suspected  lan- 
gtiage,  as  may  terminate  all  opposition  to  your  consecra- 
tion "  ;  and  adding  that  he  (the  Bishop)  believed  him  "to 
hold  the  true  faith."  "  At  the  same  time  Dr.  Wilberforce 
asked  Dr.  Hampden  certain  important  questions  : — 

"I  will,"  he  wrote,  "take  seriatim  the  truths  concerning  your 
supposed  denial  of  which  articles  are  now  prepared  in  reference  to 
the  Court  of  Arches,  and  ask  you:  ist,  To  avow  your  unhesitating 
reception  of  them.     They  are  these  : — 

"  I.  That  you  believe  that  certain  doctrines  may  be  required  to 
be  believed,  as  necessary  to  salvation,  on  the  ground  that  they  may 
be  proved  by  Holy  Scripture. 

"  2.  That  you  believe  that  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  as 
it  is  taught  by  the  Church,  is  the  expression  of  that  which  is  from 
all  eternity  in  the  Divine  nature. 

"3.  That  you  fully  believe  that  'The  Son  was  begotten  before 
all  worlds,  being  of  one  substance  with  the  Father,'  and  that  it  is 
'necessary  to  salvation  that  a  man  believe  rightly  the  Incarnation  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.' 

"4.  That  you  believe  that  the  offering  of  Christ  upon  the  Cross 
was  not  only  a  means  of  reconciling  us  to  God,  but  was  also  'a 
satisfaction  for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world.' 

"5.  That  you  believe,  in  the  plain  sense  of  the  words,  'all  men 
to  be  by  nature  born  in  sin  and  the  children  of  wrath,'  and  that  such 


^  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  i.  p.  455. 
2  Ibid.  p.  455. 


74  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

terms  may  be  properly  applied  to  infants  before  they  may  have  com- 
mitted actual  sin;  and  that  'original  or  birth  sin  is  the  fault  and 
corruption  of  the  nature  of  every  man  that  naturally  is  engendered 
of  the  offspring  of  Adam.' 

"  6.  That  you  believe,  in  the  plain  sense  of  the  words,  '  that  the 
souls  of  the  faithful,  after  they  are  delivered  from  the  burden  of  the 
flesh,  are  in  joy  and  felicity.' 

"  7.  That  you  believe,  in  the  plain  sense  of  the  words,  that  in 
Baptism  we  are  made  '  members  of  Christ,'  and  that  they  who  '  with 
a  true  penitent  heart  and  lively  faith  receive'  'the  Holy  Com- 
munion '  do  '  spiritually  eat  the  flesh  of  Christ  and  drink  His  blood,' 
— 'are  one  with  Christ  and  Christ  with  them,' 

"8.  That  you  admit,  as  containing  true  doctrine,  the  words, 
'  the  mystical  union  between  Christ  and  His  Church.' 

"9.  That  you  admit,  as  a  true  and  wholesome  doctrine,  that 
*  we  have  no  power  to  do  good  works  without  the  grace  of  Christ 
preventing  us,  that  we  may  have  a  good  will,  and  working  with  us 
when  we  have  that  good  will.' 

"  10.  That  you  receive  as  true  the  words,  '  Pour  Thy  grace  into 
our  hearts.' 

"it.  That  you  believe  the  Sacraments  of  the  Church  to  be 
'eff'ectual  signs  of  grace,  by  the  which  God  doth  work  invisibly  in 
us,'  and  are  'means  whereby  we  receive  the  same  inward  grace.' "^ 

Bishop  Wilberforce  also  asked  Dr.  Hampden  lo  with- 
draw his  Bampton  Lectures  and  his  Observations  on  Dissent 
from  circulation.  To  Lord  John  Russell  the  Bishop  sent 
a  copy  of  his  letter  to  Dr.  Hampden.  The  Prime  Minister 
in  his  reply  showed  himself  far  from  satisfied  with  the 
Bishop's  action  : — 

"  Dr.  Hampden  has,"  wrote  Lord  John  Russell  on  December 
1 8th,  "for  eleven  years  taught  divinity  as  Regius  Professor.  Can- 
didates for  Orders  were  required  by  the  Bishops,  with  the  exception 
of  five  or  six,  to  bring  certificates  that  they  had  received  from 
Dr.  Hampden  instruction  in  theology.  The  Bishops  of  Manchester 
and  Salisbury,  as  I  am  told,  sent  away  candidates  who  were  not  pro- 
vided with  Dr.  Hampden's  certificates.  How  is  such  a  man  to  be 
interrogated  upon  articles  framed,  not  by  the  Church,  but  by  one  of 
its  Bishops,  as  if  he  were  himself  a  young  student  in  divinity? 

"  This  remark  applies  to  two  of  the  three  articles  drawn  up  by 
your  lordship,  to  which   I  should  not  otherwise  object.     But  the 


Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  i.  pp.  456,  457. 


HAMPDEN'S    REPLY    TO    THE    QUESTIONS  75 

eleventh,  asking  Dr.  Hampden  to  withdraw  his  Bampton  Lectures 
and  his  Principles  of  Dissefit,  appears  to  me  to  require  that  Dr.  Hamp- 
den should  degrade  himself  in  the  eyes  of  all  men  for  the  sake  of  a 
mitre.  He  has  repeatedly  declared  that  in  these  works  he  has  not 
intended  to  profess  any  doctrine  at  variance  with  the  doctrines  of 
the  Church.  Dr.  Arnold  could  see  nothing  unsound  in  them,  nor 
can  the  Bishop  of  Durham,  or  the  Bishop  of  Chester,  or  the  Bishop 
of  Norwich,  or  the  Bishop  of  Llandaff.  Indeed  I  believe  that  Dr. 
Pusey  himself,  who  must  be  considered  as  the  leader  and  the  oracle 
of  Dr.  Hampden's  opponents,  has  written  that  he  does  not  consider 
the  opinions  of  Dr.  Hampden  unsound,  but  that  they  lead  to  un- 
soundness, and  are,  therefore,  dangerous  in  a  teacher  of  divinity."  ^ 

On  the  same  day  that  Lord  John  Russell  wrote  thus 
to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  Dr.  Hampden  wrote  also  to  that 
prelate,  in  reply  to  his  queries.  He  might  easily  have 
assumed  the  dignity  of  his  position  as  a  reason  for  de- 
clining to  answer  the  questions  put  to  him.  He  might 
reasonably  have  refused  to  be  interrogated,  to  quote  Lord 
Russell's  words,  "  as  if  he  were  himself  a  young  student 
of  divinity."  But  instead  of  assuming  this  position  he 
assumed  one  which  was  greatly  to  his  credit. 

"  If,"  wrote  Dr.  Hampden  to  the  Bishop,  "  the  queries  which  this 
letter  contains  had  come  from  any  other  source,  or  been  addressed 
to  me  under  other  circumstances,  I  think  I  should  have  been  justi- 
fied in  considering  that  an  insult  was  not  only  conveyed  but  intended 
to  be  conveyed  to  me,  by  having  such  elementary  tests  applied  to 
one  who  holds  the  position  I  do.  But,  my  Lord,  I  am  sure  your 
intention  is  to  be  a  messenger  and  instrument  of  peace ;  and  I  know 
too  well  what  even  Christian  warfare  is,  not  to  meet  such  a  proceed- 
ing on  your  part  in  the  like  kindly  spirit.  On  this  ground,  therefore, 
and  in  perfect  respect  to  you  as  the  Bishop  of  the  diocese,  and  for  your 
personal  satisfaction,  I  unhesitatingly  reply  in  the  afifiruiative.  I  say 
'  Yes '  to  all  your  queries  on  my  belief — in  that  sense  in  which  they 
are  the  plain  natural  sense  of  the  statements  of  our  Articles  and 
Formularies.  I  need  not  discuss  them,  for  I  have  repeatedly 
affirmed  every  position  in  them  drawn  from  those  authoritative 
sources,  commencing  with  my  Catechism  as  a  child,  in  the  daily  use 
of  the  Liturgy,  in  my  subscription  and  adherence  to  the  Articles, 
and  in  the  constant  use  of  my  ministerial  office.     I  have  affirmed 

^  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  i.  p.  459. 


76  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

them  in  public  and  in  private,  in  the  pulpit,  in  my  works,  from  the 
Chair  of  Divinity,  and  in  the  other  offices  I  have  held  in  the 
University,  and  in  the  very  works  which  have  attracted  so  much 
notice,  and  have  been  subjected  to  so  much  misrepresentation."  ^ 

Such  a  letter  as  this  ought  to  have  satisfied  Dr. 
Hampden's  prosecutors.  It  was  sufficient  to  prove  to  any 
candid  mind  that,  as  Bishop  of  Hereford,  there  was  no 
reason  to  fear  that  he  would  teach  heretical  doctrine. 
What  had  happened  would  have  been  quite  enough  to 
make  him  careful  as  to  the  language  he  employed  in 
teaching  Christian  doctrine,  however  careless  he  might 
have  been  in  this  respect  in  the  past.  But  his  prose- 
cutors were  not  satisfied.  Nothing  would  suffice  for  them 
but  a  public  apology,  and  a  withdrawal  of  his  Bampton 
Lectures.  His  Observations  on  Dissent  had  not  been  issued 
with  Dr.  Hampden's  consent  since  the  second  edition  was 
sold  out  some  years  previously.  When  Bishop  Wilber- 
force  learnt  that  the  pamphlet  was  no  longer  in  circulation 
with  the  consent  of  Dr.  Hampden,  and  after  he  had 
received  a  letter  from  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
stating  that  in  his  opinion  the  Letters  of  Request  should 
be  withdrawn,  he  felt  that  it  was  no  longer  desirable  that 
the  prosecution  should  proceed,  and,  therefore,  he  with- 
drew the  Letters  of  Request  accordingly.  The  Tract- 
arians,  of  course,  at  once  directed  their  fury  against  the 
unfortunate  Bishop  of  Oxford,  who  had  now  given  them 
mortal  offence.  Dr.  Pusey  declared  that  the  Bishop's 
conduct  "  was  far  more  injurious  to  the  Church  than  Dr. 
Hampden's  appointment.  An  act  of  tyranny  hurts  not 
the  Church  ;  the  betrayal  by  her  own  guardians  does  ; " 
and  he  went  on  to  express  the  opinion  that  his  lordship's 
withdrawal  of  the  Letters  of  Request  was  "  the  greatest 
blow  the  Church  has  had  since  Newman's  secession."  ^  At 
that  time  the  Tractarians  were  bitterly  opposed  to  the  exer- 
cise of  the  Episcopal  Veto  on  the  prosecutions  which  they 
had  initiated.  When  the  High  Church  Bishop  of  Exeter 
(Dr.  Phillpotts)  heard  that  Bishop  Wilberforce  had  vetoed 

^  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  i.  pp.  461,  462. 
^  Life  of  Dr.  Piisey,  vol.  iii.  pp.  162,  163. 


OPPOSITION    TO    THE    EPISCOPAL    VETO  77 

the  prosecution  of  Hampden  he  was  greatly  annoyed  and 
disappointed.  He  thought  the  Church  Discipline  Act  of 
1840  did  not  permit  of  the  exercise  of  the  Episcopal 
Veto,  which  he  considered  "  a  very  invidious "  and 
''  dangerous "  power  to  be  placed  in  the  hands  of  the 
Bishops. 

"I  may,"  he  wrote  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  "be  mistaken  in  my 
construction  of  the  Statute.  It  may  give  you  the  power  to  do  what 
you  have  done — to  determine  absolutely,  of  your  own  mere  will  or 
on  your  own  mere  opinion,  that  the  suit  shall  not  be  prosecuted.  If 
this  be  the  proper  construction  of  the  Statute,  I  shall  deeply  lament  it, 
for  it  will  give  to  us  Bishops  a  much  greater  amount  of  power,  and,  in 
consequence,  of  responsibility,  than  I  think  safe  for  ourselves,  much 
less  wise  in  the  law  to  entrust  to  any  men. 

"Still,  even  so,  I  should  myself  deem  it  at  once  my  wisdom  and 
my  duty  to  forbear  from  acting  on  so  very  t?ividious  and  dangerous 
a  power  in  any  case  whatever  which  I  can  contemplate,  certainly  in 
any  way  which  should  have  the  slightest  semblance  of  affinity  to  the 
one  in  which  you  have  exercised  it."  ^ 

One  can  almost  afford  to  smile  at  the  anxiety  of  the 
early  Tractarians  to  prosecute  their  opponents.  Had  they 
been  successful  in  their  efforts  we  should  never  have  heard 
any  Ritualistic  complaints  against  the  existing  Ecclesias- 
tical Courts.  It  was  only  when  they  discovered  that  the 
Courts  were  against  them  that  they  turned  against  the 
Courts.  When  Hampden's  opponents  found  the  doors  of 
the  Court  of  Arches  closed  against  them  by  the  Bishop  of 
Oxford,  they  determined  to  oppose  him  by  publicly  pro- 
testing in  Hereford  Cathedral  against  his  election  by  the 
Dean  and  Chapter.  On  the  receipt  of  the  Conge  d'elire 
addressed  to  the  Dean  and  Chapter  of  Hereford,  the  Dean 
of  Hereford  addressed  a  Memorial  to  the  Queen,  dated 
December  17,  1847,  containing  the  following  petition: 
— "We  most  humbly  pray  your  Majesty  to  name  and 
recommend  some  other  person  whom  your  Majesty  shall 
think  meet  to  be  elected  by  us  for  our  Bishop,  or  that 
your  Majesty  will  graciously  relieve  us  from  the  necessity  of 
proceeding  to  the  election  till  you  shall  have  been  pleased 

"^  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  i.  p.  490. 


78  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

to  submit  Dr.  Renn  Dickson  Hampden's  published  writings 
(so  judged  as  aforesaid  by  the  Convocation  of  the  Univer- 
sity of  Oxford),  to  the  judgment  either  of  the  two  Houses 
of  Convocation  of  Clergy  of  the  Province  of  Canterbury, 
which  is  now  sitting,  or  of  the  Provincial  Council  of 
Bishops  of  the  same  Province,  assisted  by  such  divines 
as  your  Majesty  or  the  said  Provincial  Council  shall  be 
pleased  to  call,  or  of  some  other  competent  tribunal  which 
your  Majesty  shall  be  graciously  pleased  to  appoint."  ^ 
Unfortunately  for  the  Dean,  his  Memorial  received  a  very 
chilling  reception.  He  received  from  Sir  G.  Grey  a  reply, 
stating  that  it  had  been  laid  before  the  Queen,  but  that 
"  Her  Majesty  has  not  been  pleased  to  issue  any  commands 
thereupon."  Nothing  daunted,  the  militant  Dean  once 
more  addressed  a  letter  of  protest  to  Lord  John  Russell, 
dated  December  22nd,  and  concluding  with  the  announce- 
ment : — "  I  say,  my  Lord,  having  fully  counted  the  cost, 
having  weighed  the  sense  of  bounden  duty  in  the  one 
scale  against  the  consequences  in  the  other,  I  have  come 
to  the  deliberate  resolve,  that  on  Tuesday  next  no  earthly 
consideration  shall  induce  me  to  give  my  vote  in  the 
Chapter  of  Hereford  Cathedral  for  Dr.  Hampden's  eleva- 
tion to  the  See  of  Hereford."  ^  The  Dean's  letter  to  the 
Prime  Minister  was  in  vain.  His  lordship  coldly  replied 
as  follows  : — "  Sir, — I  have  had  the  honour  to  receive 
your  letter  of  the  22nd  inst.,  in  which  you  intimate  to 
me  your  intention  of  violating  the  law. — I  have,  &c., 
J.  Russell." 

At  length  the  day  of  Election  arrived.  People  were 
everywhere  full  of  curiosity  to  know  what  the  Dean  and 
Chapter  of  Hereford  would  do.  The  Chapter  assembled 
in  the  Cathedral  Library  on  Tuesday,  December  28th. 
Seventeen  members  (including  the  Dean,  who  presided) 
were  present.  After  the  Conge  d'e'Izre  and  the  Queen's 
Letter  Missive  had  been  read,  the  Chapter  proceeded  to 
the  election.  Fifteen  voted  for  Dr.  Hampden,  and  two 
against,  viz..  Canon   Huntingford  and  the   Dean.     These 

^  The  full  text  of  the  Memorial  was  published  in  the  E7tglish  Churchman, 
Dec.  23,  1847,  pp.  920,  921. 
'^  Ibid.  Dec.  30,  1847,  p.  934. 


PROTEST  BY  THE  DEAN  OF  HEREFORD       79 

gentlemen  each  read  a  separate  protest,  explaining  their 
reasons  for  the  course  they  took.  Canon  Huntingford 
said: — "With  the  utmost  respect  for  the  Royal  Preroga- 
tive, and  with  a  full  conviction  that  it  is  for  the  peace  and 
safety  of  the  Church,  that  the  Crown  should  nominate  to 
vacant  Sees,  yet  in  this  particular  instance  I  feel  obliged 
to  defer  complying  with  the  recommendation  which  has 
been  sent  down  to  us,  until  a  competent  tribunal  shall 
have  pronounced  to  have  been  well  founded  or  not  the 
sentiments  expressed  by  so  many  Bishops  of  our  Church, 
and  by  so  many  members  of  one  of  our  Universities."  ^ 
The  Dean  of  Hereford  gave  similar  reasons  for  his  vote, 
and  concluded  with  this  statement: — "I,  therefore,  John 
Merewether,  D.D.,  Dean  of  the  Cathedral  Church  of  Here- 
ford, am  dissentient.  I  cannot  vote  for  Dr.  Renn  Dickson 
Hampden  as  a  Bishop  and  Pastor  of  the  Cathedral  Church 
where  I  am  Dean.  And  I  further  protest."  ^  It  must,  I 
think,  be  admitted  that  both  the  Dean  and  Canon  Hunt- 
ingford deserved  credit  for  the  courage  which  led  them 
thus  to  act  according  to  the  dictates  of  their  consciences, 
however  mistaken  their  judgments  may  have  been.  But 
all  their  efforts  were  in  vain.  Dr.  Hampden  was  declared 
elected  as  Bishop  of  Hereford.  Certificates  of  his  election 
were  at  once  forwarded  to  the  Queen,  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  and  to  the  Bishop  Elect,  in  which  nothing 
whatever  was  said  about  the  alleged  unsound  teaching  of 
the  divine  elected  ;  but  the  Dean  succeeded  in  having  a 
formal  protest  of  his  own  appended  to  each  of  the  three 
certificates.  In  this  protest  the  Dean  did  not  object  to 
Dr.  Hampden  on  account  of  his  supposed  heresy,  but 
because  "  certain  persons  have  voted,  who  (I  have  reason 
to  believe,  being  merely  Honorary  Prebendaries,  and  not 
having  conformed  to  the  provisions  of  the  statutes  of  this 
Church,  which  I  have  sworn  to  observe),  are  not  qualified 
to  vote  in  Chapter,  and  also  because  the  majority  so 
constituted    has  not,    according  to  the  said  statutes,  the 

^   The   Case  of  Dr.   Hainpden.      By  Richard  Jebb,    Barrister-at-Law,  p.  6. 
London :   1849. 
2  Ibid.^.  II. 


8o  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Dean  and  three  Residentiaries  at  the  least  voting  therein."  ^ 
No  official  notice,  so  far  as  I  am  able  to  ascertain,  appears 
to  have  been  taken  of  this  protest. 

And  now,  all  efforts  at  preventing  the  Election  of  Dr. 
Hampden  having  utterly  failed,  the  efforts  of  his  enemies 
were  next  directed  to  preparation  for  opposition  to  his 
forthcoming  Confirmation  in  Bow  Church.  Pusey  and 
Keble  were  particularly  zealous  in  this  direction.  "  Pusey 
and  Keble,"  writes  Canon  Liddon,  "  were  busily  engaged 
in  preparing  theological  matter  for  the  use  of  Counsel  at 
Bow  Church.  '  I  found  things,'  writes  Pusey  to  Marriott, 
on  January  2,  1848,  'in  Godliman  Street,  in  most  utter 
confusion.  Our  articles  of  indictment  just  in  the  state  in 
which  they  were  sent  in.  The  heads  of  K.'s  [Keble's] 
articles  (that  is,  his  preamble)  not  fitted  in  into  the  sequel 
(the  allegations).  I  spent  five  and  a  half  hours  there  on 
Friday,  and  put  them  to  rights  ;  at  least  ready  to  be  copied 
out.'  ""  The  Confirmation  of  the  Election  of  Dr.  Hampden 
took  place  in  Bow  Church  on  Tuesday,  January  11,  1848. 
No  fewer  than  ten  legal  gentlemen  appeared  in  the 
Church,  three  representing  the  Dean  and  Chapter  of 
Hereford,  one  for  Dr.  Hampden,  and  six  for  the  opposers 
of  the  Confirmation.  When  opposers  were  publicly 
called  by  the  Apparitor-General  to  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  several  of  the  learned  Counsel  rose  one 
after  the  other  and  asked  to  be  heard  ;  but  the  Court 
refused  to  hear  their  objections,  after  allowing  them  at 
some  length  to  argue  in  favour  of  being  heard.  The 
arguments  used  on  this  occasion  are  printed  verbatim  in 
The  Case  of  Dr.  Hampden,  edited  by  Mr.  Richard  Jebb, 
Barrister-at-Law,  pp.  30-50.  Dr.  Hampden's  accusers 
were  again  unsuccessful,  and  his  Confirmation  was  there- 
fore completed.  An  interesting  account  of  the  scene  is 
given  by  Archdeacon  Clark  in  his  "  Recollections,"  printed 
in  the  Memorials  of  Bishop  Hampden. 

"  I  was  present,"  he  writes,   "  at  Bow  Church  when  his  [Dr. 
Hampden's]  Confirmation  as  Bishop  was  opposed  by  the  Dean  of 

^  Jebb's  The  Case  of  Dr.  Hampden,  p.  13. 
"^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  iii.  p.  163. 


HAMPDEN    AT    BOW    CHURCH  8 1 

Hereford.  The  ceremony  took  place  on  a  week  day,  at  a  busy  hour, 
when  Cheapside  is  usually  most  densely  crowded.  On  this  occasion, 
as  we  approached  the  Church,  the  stream  of  human  beings  usually 
in  motion  was  arrested,  Cheapside  was  in  a  state  of  congestion,  and 
it  was  with  difficulty  that  the  Bishop's  carriage  reached  the  Church. 
It  was  evident  that  all  other  business  was  suspended,  and  that  the 
one  object  of  interest  to  the  excited  crowd  was  the  new  Bishop.  There 
could  be  no  doubt  that  the  popular  feeling  was  on  his  side.  Again 
and  again,  as  he  passed  to  and  from  the  Church,  he  was  loudly 
cheered,  not  a  single  sound  of  dissent  or  disapproval  being  heard. 
On  entering  the  Church  the  scene  was  still  more  striking  and 
memorable.  The  whole  area  of  the  Church  and  the  galleries  were 
crowded,  spectators  were  standing  on  the  seats  and  backs  of  pews.  .  .  . 
When  at  length  the  ceremony  was  over,  and  we  succeeded  in  forcing 
our  way  through  the  vestry  and  the  crowded  porch  into  the  street, 
the  enthusiasm  of  the  people  could  not  be  restrained.  It  was  really 
a  service  of  danger  for  those  who  accompanied  the  Bishop.  Every- 
body pressed  forward  to  see  and  congratulate  him ;  and  if  we  had 
not  turned  ourselves  into  his  body-guard,  and  almost  covered  him 
as  he  passed  through  the  crowd,  he  was  in  some  danger  of  being 
crushed  by  his  admirers.  When  we  were  seated  in  the  carriage, 
Cheapside  rang  again  with  repeated  cheers,  which  followed  us  until 
we  were  fairly  out  of  sight.  Some  of  the  crowd  pursued  the  carriage 
for  some  distance  through  St.  Paul's  Churchyard,  to  see  and  con- 
gratulate the  persecuted  Bishop."^ 

But  the  Bishop-Elect  of  Hereford  was  not  yet  out  of 
his  troubles.  Only  three  days  later,  viz.  on  January  14th, 
Sir  Fitzroy  Kelly  applied  to  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench 
for  a  rule  to  show  cause  why  a  mandamus  should  not  issue 
directed  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  his  Vicar- 
General,  commanding  them,  or  one  of  them,  to  hold  a 
Court  at  which  they  should  permit  and  admit  to  appear 
in  due  form  of  law,  the  Rev.  R.  W.  Huntley,  Vicar  of 
Alderbury  ;  the  Rev.  John  Jebb,  Rector  of  Peterstow  ; 
and  the  Rev.  W.  F.  Powell,  Vicar  of  Cirencester,  ''  to 
oppose  the  said  Confirmation  of  the  said  Election  of  the 
said  Dr.  Renn  Dickson  Hampden,  and  to  hear  and 
determine  upon  such  opposition,  and  upon  the  articles, 
matters,  and  proof  thereof."  ^     The  application  was  really 

^  Memorials  of  Bishop  Hampden,  pp.  251-253. 
^  The  Case  of  Dr.  Hampden,  p.  92. 


82  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

made  for  the  purpose  of  setting  aside  the  decision  of  the 
Vicar-General  at  Bow  Church  refusing  to  hear  objectors. 
The  Court  granted  the  Rule,  and  on  January  24th  the 
case  came  on  for  hearing  before  Lord  Denman,  and 
Justices  Coleridge,  Pattison,  and  Erie.  After  hearing 
Counsel  on  both  sides  the  Court  reserved  judgment  until 
February  ist,  when  Mr.  Justice  Coleridge  and  Mr.  Justice 
Pattison  gave  judgment  in  favour  of  granting  the  Rule, 
while  Lord  Denman  and  Mr.  Justice  Erie  gave  judgment 
against  the  Rule.  The  result  was  that,  the  Court  being 
equally  divided,  the  application  of  Dr.  Hampden's  oppo- 
nents fell  to  the  ground. 

On  the  4th  of  February  the  three  clergymen  whose 
application  to  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench  fell  through, 
petitioned  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  (Dr.  Howley)  as 
their  "  remaining  and  best  resource,"  to  grant  "  a  compe- 
tent ecclesiastical  inquiry  into  our  objections,  and  into 
the  whole  of  the  works  we  have  mentioned,"  before  the 
consecration  of  Dr.  Hampden.-^  But,  unfortunately  for 
their  hopes,  the  Archbishop  was  then  on  his  death-bed, 
and  died  only  seven  days  later.  His  successor  (Dr. 
Sumner)  sent  a  formal  acknowledgment  of  the  receipt 
of  the  Memorial,  but  he  did  not  think  it  wise  to  grant 
its  request.  And  so,  on  March  26,  1848,  Dr.  Hampden 
was  at  last  consecrated  in  the  Chapel  of  Lambeth  Palace 
as  Bishop  of  Hereford.  The  consecrating  prelate  was 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  (Dr.  Sumner),  who  was 
assisted  by  the  Bishop  of  Llandaff  (Dr.  Copleston),  the 
Bishop  of  Norwich  (Dr.  Stanley),  and  the  Bishop  of 
Worcester  (Dr.  Pepys). 

It  must  not  be  supposed  that  throughout  this  heated 
controversy  Dr.  Hampden  was  without  friends  and  sup- 
porters. On  the  contrary,  he  received  the  sympathy  and 
help  of  many  influential  personages  in  Church  and  State. 
The  Prime  Minister  was  throughout  one  of  his  firmest 
friends,  and  when  the  news  of  his  election  reached  Woburn 
Abbey,  Lord  John   Russell's  residence,  it  created  quite  an 

^   The  Case  of  Dr.  Hampden,  p.  500. 


SYMPATHY  WITH  HAMPDEN  83 

excitement.  Baron  Bunsen  was  on  a  visit  there  at  the 
time,  and  in  a  letter  to  his  wife  described  what  took  place 
on  the  reception  of  the  news  : — 

"Yesterday,"  he  wrote,  "was  a  day  of  satisfaction  for  the  house 
of  Russell,  the  news  having  arrived  of  Dr.  Hampden's  election. 
Lord  John  had  been  much  vexed  in  the  latter  days  by  the  unreason- 
ableness of  the  people  he  had  to  deal  with — but  yesterday  at  three 
o'clock,  when  we  were  collected  in  expectation,  and  talking  against 
time,  in  came  little  Johnny  [Viscount  Amberley],  escorted  by  his 
aunt-like  sister,  and  stationed  himself  at  the  entrance  of  the  library, 
distinctly  proclaiming,  like  a  herald,  *  Dr.  Hampden, — a  Bishop!' 
We  cheered  him,  and  some  one  asked  him  whether  he  liked  Dr. 

H .     '  I  don't  mind  (was  his  answer)  for  I  don't  know  him.'     His 

father  came  in  afterwards,  radiant  with  satisfaction.  After  dinner, 
I  suggested  as  a  toast,  '  The  Chapter  of  Hereford,'  adding  sotto 
voce  to  Lord  John,  '  and  he  who  has  managed  them.'  Milnes  and 
Stafford  gave  '  The  Dean,'  in  opposition,  and  we  were  just  divided, 
like  the  Chapter,  two  against  fifteen.  Lord  John  took  all  very 
kindly."  ^ 

Dr.  Hampden  received  many  addresses  of  sympathy 
from  both  clergy  and  laity.  His  fellow-citizens  in  Oxford 
presented  him  with  a  public  address,  expressing  confidence 
in  him  as  one  who  had  set  forth  and  enforced  "  the  great 
cardinal  doctrines  of  a  religion  based  on  the  Word  of 
God."  He  received  also  a  general  address  from  friends 
throughout  the  country,  chiefly  signed  by  the  clergy,  but 
including  the  names  of  members  of  both  Houses  of  Par- 
liament ;  and  other  addresses  from  members  of  Oxford 
Convocation,  and  the  Chapters  of  York  and  Gloucester. 
His  daughter  states  that,  in  connection  with  these  addresses, 
"  the  point  to  which  he  attached  the  greatest  importance 
was,  that  this  support  was  offered  to  him  on  account  of 
his  teaching  and  defence  of  the  principles  of  the  Church 
of  England  as  established  by  the  Reformation."  ^  Of 
these  addresses  perhaps  the  most  important  and  signi- 
ficant   was    that    which    was    signed   by    no    fewer   than 

^  Memoirs  of  Baron  Bunsen,  vol.  ii.  p.  155. 
^  Memorials  of  Bishop  Hampden,  p.  153. 


84  HISTORY  OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

fifteen  out  of  the  twenty-two  Heads  of  Houses.     It  was 
as  follows  : — 

"  To  THE  Rev.  Dr.  Hampden,  Regius  Professor  of 
Divinity,  &c. 

"  We,  the  undersigned  Heads  of  Houses  in  the  University  of 
Oxford,  have  seen  with  great  concern  the  report  of  proceedings  in 
various  parts  of  the  country  upon  your  proposed  appointment  to  the 
See  of  Hereford,  tending  to  injure  your  reputation,  impede  your 
future  usefulness,  and  even  create  a  general  distrust  of  the  sound- 
ness of  your  faith  in  our  Blessed  Lord.  Under  such  circumstances, 
although  we  only  declare  the  sentiments  which  many  of  us  have 
expressed  before,  and  particularly  upon  the  enactment  in  1842  of 
the  new  statute  concerning  theological  instruction,  we  desire  to 
assure  you,  that  having  for  years  enjoyed  ample  opportunities  of 
learning  the  tenor  of  your  public  teaching,  and  hearing  your  dis- 
courses from  the  pulpit  of  the  University,  we  are  not  only  satisfied 
that  your  religious  belief  is  sound,  but  we  look  forward  with  con- 
fidence to  your  endeavours  to  preach  the  Gospel  of  Christ  in  its 
integrity. 

"B.  P.  Symons,  Warden  of  Wadham,  and  Vice-Chancellor. 

Edward  Hawkins,  Provost  of  Oriel 

James  Ingram,  President  of  Trinity. 

Philip  Wynter,  President  of  St.  John's, 

John  Radford,  Rector  of  Lincoln. 

Henry  Foulkes,  Principal  of  Jesus  College. 

Thomas  Gaisford,  Dean  of  Christ  Church. 

John  David  Macbride,  Principal  of  Magdalene  Hall. 

David  Williams,  Warden  of  New  College. 

Frederick  Charles  Plumptre,  Master  of  University  College. 

Henry  Wellesley,  Principal  of  New  Inn  Hall. 

R.  Bullock  Marsham,  Warden  of  Merton. 

William  Thompson,  Principal  of  St.  Edmund  Hall. 

James  Norris,  President  of  Christ  Church  College. 

Francis  Jeune,  Master  of  Pembroke."  ^ 

The  history  of  the  Hampden  Case  throws  a  great  deal 
of  light  on  the  early  tactics  of  the  Tractarian  party.  In 
reality,  as  I  have  already  said,  I  believe.  Dr.  Hampden's 
latitudinarian  views  were  only  the  ostensible  cause  of 
the  furious  attacks  made  upon  him.     The  real  cause  of 

^  English  Churchman,  January  6,  1848,  p.  6. 


TRACTARIANS  AS  PROSECUTORS  85 

offence  was  his  outspoken  Protestantism,  though  it  must 
be  admitted  that  the  early  Tractarians  were  sincerely 
opposed  to  his  latitudinarian  tendencies.  But  they  could 
not  bear  that  the  "  Traditions  "  of  the  Church,  her  decrees 
and  Creeds,  should  be  thought  of  less  importance  than  the 
written  Word  of  God.  Dr.  Hampden's  vigorous  attacks 
upon  the  sacerdotal  teaching,  ever  so  dear  to  the  hearts 
of  the  enemies  of  the  Gospel  and  the  friends  of  priestcraft, 
made  the  Tractarians  almost  wild  with  rage.  But,  as  far 
as  possible,  they  carefully  concealed  from  the  public  gaze 
the  real  cause  of  offence,  and  in  this  way  they  gained  the 
support  of  many  Evangelicals,  who  were  at  least  quite  as 
zealous  for  the  Orthodox  Faith,  as  any  of  the  Tractarians. 
And  is  it  not  a  remarkable  fact  that  Rationalistic  views  as 
to  the  inspiration  and  truth  of  the  Bible,  far  more  objec- 
tionable than  were  ever  taught  by  Dr.  Hampden,  are 
now  openly  avowed  by  many  leading  members  of  the 
Ritualistic  party,  the  successors  of  the  Tractarians  ? 
The  Hampden  Crusade  was  conducted  by  the  real  wire- 
pullers as  a  part  of  a  deeply  laid  scheme  to  banish  Ultra- 
Protestantism,  as  held  by  the  Reformers  in  the  sixteenth 
century,  out  of  the  Church  of  England.  All  opponents 
were  to  be  removed  out  of  the  way,  and  Dr.  Hampden,  as 
Regius  Professor,  and  afterwards  as  a  Bishop,  was  very 
much  in  the  way  of  the  success  of  their  schemes.  They 
tried  to  get  rid  of  him,  and  failed.  And  in  their  prosecu- 
tion of  their  Crusade  they  did  not  despise  the  strong  arm 
of  the  law.  The  existing  Courts  of  Law,  now  so  much 
reviled  and  abused,  were  then  thought  good  enough  to 
decide  the  law  as  to  the  highest  Christian  doctrines.  The 
chief  leaders  of  the  party,  Dr.  Pusey  and  Keble,  were,  as 
we  have  seen,  the  most  zealous,  and  the  leading  workers 
in  the  proposed  prosecution  of  Dr.  Hampden,  thirty 
years  before  the  Church  Association  came  into  existence. 
Ecclesiastical  prosecutions  were  not  abused  then  by  the 
leaders  of  the  Oxford  Movement.  On  the  contrary,  they 
were  in  high  favour,  and  if  they  had  only  succeeded  in 
their  hands  all  our  present  troubles  about  Ecclesiastical 
Courts  would  have  been  unknown. 


CHAPTER    IV 

Dr.  Pusey's  early  Protestantism — Extracts  from  his  Historical  Enquiry 
— His  Theological  Society — "  The  young  Monks" — Th^  Library  of 
the  Fathers — Mr.  Bickersteth  approves  of  the  Library — Lord  Sel- 
borne  on  the  Fathers — Richard  Hurrell  Froude — His  influence  on 
Newman— His  admiration  of  Rome,  and  dislike  of  the  Reformation 
— Newman's  early  love  of  Rome — His  mind  "  essentially  Jesuitical  " 
— Froude's  Remains — Extracts  from  the  Remains^  showing  his 
Romanising  principles  —  Professor  Faussett's  University  sermon 
against  the  Tractarians — The  Rev.  Peter  Maurice's  Popery  in  Oxford 
— Dr.  Pusey  insults  Mr.  Maurice — Newman's  reply  to  Faussett — 
Dr.  Hook's  Call  to  Union — Bishop  of  Oxford's  Visitation  Charge — 
The  Oxford  Martyrs'  Memorial — Pusey  thinks  it  "unkind  to  the 
Church  of  Rome" — Keble  thinks  Cranmer  a  Heretic — "  Cranmer 
burnt  well  " — Tractarian  opposition  to  the  Memorial — The  inscrip- 
tion on  the  Oxford  Martyrs'  Memorial. 

The  leaders  of  the  Oxford  Movement  were  wise  in  their 
day  and  generation.  They  realised  the  vast  importance 
of  influencing  those  who  were  destined  to  be  the  teachers 
and  leaders  of  the  rising  generation.  At  first,  the  move- 
ment was  mainly  confined  to  the  educated  classes,  the 
poor  were  only  thought  of  afterwards.  I  do  not  say  they 
were  wise  in  making,  even  for  a  time,  the  poor  a  secondary 
consideration  ;  but  they  certainly  realised  from  the  com- 
mencement, in  a  way  the  Evangelicals  never  have  done 
yet  (to  anything  like  a  sufficient  extent),  that  if  the  laity 
are  to  be  instructed  and  influenced,  their  clergy  must  first 
of  all  have  been  educated  sufficiently  in  their  faith. 

The  formation  by  Dr.  Pusey  of  a  Theological  Society, 
in  1835,  greatly  assisted  the  Tractarians  in  this  direction. 
Dr.  Pusey  was  much  slower  in  imbibing  Roman  doctrine 
than  Newman.  As  recently  as  1828  he  had  published 
the  first  part  of  An  Historical  Enquiry  into  the  Rationalist 
Character  of  the  Theology  of  Germany,  the  second  part  of 
which  appeared  in  1830,  containing  many  opinions  which 

86 


pusey's  early  protestantism  87 

in  after  life  he  ceased  to  hold.  Its  strong  praise  of  Martin 
Luther,  and  its  declaration  that  Scripture  is  its  own  inter- 
preter, instead  of  being  interpreted  by  the  Church,  show 
that  at  that  early  period  Pusey  was  in  full  sympathy  with 
much  that  is  held  dear  by  Lutheran  Protestants. 

"  The  fruitless  attempts,"  wrote  Pusey,  "  to  satisfy  an  uneasy  and 
active  conscience  by  the  meritorious  performances  of  a  Romish  Con- 
vent had  opened  his  [Luther's]  eyes  to  the  right  understanding  of 
Scripture,  in  whose  doctrines  alone  it  could  find  rest ;  and  the  clear 
and  discerning  faith  which  this  correspondence  of  Scripture  with  his 
own  experience  strengthened  in  him,  gave  him  that  intuitive  insight 
into  the  nature  of  Christianity,  which  enabled  him  for  the  most  part 
unfailingly  to  discriminate  between  essentials  and  non-essentials,  and 
raised  him  not  only  above  the  assumed  authority  of  the  Church  and 
above  the  might  of  Tradition,  but  above  the  influence  of  hereditary 
scholastic  opinions,  the  power  of  prejudices,  and  the  dominion  of 
the  letter.  Unfortunately,  however,  the  further  expansion  of  his 
views  necessarily  yielded  to  the  then  yet  more  important  practical 
employments,  to  which  f/u's  Great  Apostle  of  Evayigdical  Truth  dedi- 
cated the  most  of  his  exertions."  ^ 

The  following  statement  of  Pusey  as  to  the  right 
method  of  interpreting  the  Bible,  would  certainly  not  be 
accepted  by  his  followers  of  the  present  day : — 

*'  The  Reformers,  in  consistency  with  their  great  tenet,  that 
Scripture  is  the  only  authoritative  source  of  Christian  knowledge, 
had  laid  the  study  of  the  sacred  volume  as  the  foundation  of  all 
Theological  science.  In  the  pursuance  of  this  principle  they  had 
established  as  the  rule  of  interpretation  one  which,  when  correctly 
developed,  contains  all  the  elements  of  right  exposition,  which  have 
since  been  gradually  vindicated  by  the  combination  of  several  partial 
efforts.  Their,  or  rather  the  Biblical,  rule  that  '  Scripture  is  its  own 
interpreter,'  includes  in  itself  the  religious,  historical,  grammatical 
elements  which  were  imperfectly,  because  separately,  brought  forward 
by  Spener,  Semler,  and  Ernesti.  For  it  is  obvious  that  if  Scripture 
is  to  be  understood  from  itself,  those  only  can  rightly  and  fully  under- 
stand it  who  have  a  mind  kindred  to  that  of  its  author ;  and  as  any 
human  production,  upon  which  the  mind  of  its  author  is  impressed, 

^  All  Historical  Enquiry  into  the  Probable  Causes  of  the  Rationalist  Character 
of  the  Theology  of  Germany.  By  E.  B.  Pusey,  M.A.  Part  I.  p.  8.  London : 
1SS2. 


88  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

will  be  best  understood  by  him  whose  intellectual  and  moral  char 
acter  is  most  allied  to  the  original  which  it  expresses.  ...  In 
religious  writings  it  is  plain  that  the  spirit  required  is  a  religious 
spirit ;  that  none  can  truly  understand  St.  Paul  or  St.  John,  whose 
mind  has  not  been  brought  into  harmony  with  theirs,  has  not  been 
elevated  and  purified  by  the  same  Spirit  with  which  they  were  filled ; 
and  this,  unquestionably,  is  what  the  pious  Spener  meant  by  his 
much  disputed  assertion,  that  none  but  the  regenerate  could  under- 
stand Holy  Scripture^  ^ 

Pusey  withdrew  both  parts  of  his  book  from  circulation, 
and  Canon  Liddon  informs  us  that  "  he  never  referred  to 
them  without  regret  and  self-condemnation  "  ;  ^  and  that 
"  to  the  last  he  felt  anxious  as  to  the  untoward  influence," 
as  he  called  it,  "  of  these  books."  In  his  will,  dated  Nov- 
ember 19,  1875,  he  desired  that  "the  two  books  on  the 
Theology  of  Germany  should  not  be  republished."  ^  At 
the  period  when  this  work  was  issued,  Pusey's  views  as 
to  Episcopacy  were  Protestant.  "  Pusey,"  says  Canon 
Liddon,  "  had  not  quite  realised,  as  Rose  had  in  fact 
implicitly  asserted,  that  the  Episcopate  is  an  organic 
feature  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  the  absence  of  which 
could  not  but  be  attended  by  spiritual  disorder."  *  Even 
in  1836  Pusey  believed  that  priestly  absolution  was  not 
a  judicial  act.  Writing  to  the  Rev.  J.  F.  Russell  on 
December  10,  1836,  he  remarked  : — "  In  Absolution,  the 
contrast  is  not  between  '  declaratory '  and  '  ministerial,' 
but  between  'ministerial'  and  'judicial.'  It  is  this  last 
which  the  Church  of  Rome  holds  and  we  do  not."  ^  In 
the  preface  to  his  Scriptural  Views  of  Baptism,  written  in 
1836,  Pusey  declared  that,  in  his  opinion,  "the  Romanist, 
by  the  Sacrament  of  Penance,"  "  would  forestall  the  sentence 
of  his  Judge."  ^  Later  on  in  life,  Pusey  accepted  the 
doctrine  that  the  priest  acts  as  "judge"  when  bestowing 
Absolution — the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  Rome. 

But  even  when,  in  1835,  Pusey  founded  the  Theo- 
logical  Society  at   Oxford,  he   had    gone  far  away  from 

^  Pusey's  Historical  Enquiry,  Part  I.  pp.  26,  27. 

^  Life  of  Dr,  Pusey,  vol.  i.  p.  173. 

'  tbid.  p.  176.  *  Ibid.  p.  171.  »  /^2'^_  p_  ^qi. 

*  Tracts  Jor  the  Times.     Preface  to  Nos.  67,  68,  69,  p.  xiv. 


PUSEY'S    THEOLOGICAL    SOCIETY  89 

Protestantism  in  many  respects,  and  the  consequence  was 
that,  while  in  theory  the  new  Society  was  open  to  every 
party  in  the  Church,  it  became  practically  a  propaganda 
for  Tractarianism.  This  is  frankly  acknowledged  by 
Canon  Liddon,  who  tells  us  that: — "There  can  be  no 
question  of  the  influence  of  this  Society  on  the  Oxford 
Movement.  It  stimulated  theological  thought  and  work 
more  than  any  other  agency  in  Oxford  at  the  time.  .  ,  . 
Above  all,  it  fed  both  the  British  Magazine  and  the  Tracts 
for  the  Times,  especially  the  latter,  with  a  series  of  essays 
upon  subjects  of  which  little  was  known  or  thought  in 
those  days."  ^  Canon  Overton  tells  us  that  this  Theo- 
logical Society  "was  at  first  intended  to  be  confined  to 
no  party  in  the  Church.  Men  were  invited  to  join  who 
had  no  sympathy  with  the  founder's  views  ;  but  these 
either  declined  or  soon  withdrew ;  and  the  Society  be- 
came as  much  a  part  of  the  Movement  as  the  Tracts 
themselves."  ^ 

At  about  the  time  when  the  Theological  Society  was 
founded,  Pusey  took  into  his  house  at  Oxford  three  or  four 
Bachelors  of  Arts,  and  kept  them  there  at  his  own  expense, 
in  order  that  they  might  give  themselves  more  fully  to  the 
study  of  Divinity.  Of  course,  those  selected  were  men 
likely  to  prove  serviceable  to  the  Oxford  Movement.  This 
plan  was  continued  until  the  summer  of  1838,  when 
Newman  took  a  house  for  the  young  men  in  St.  Aldate's, 
Oxford,  and  for  about  two  years  it  seems  to  have  been 
under  his  control.  It  was  to  be  used,  Mr.  J.  B.  Mozley 
(who  was  its  first  inmate)  informed  his  sister,  on  April  27, 
1838,  as  "a  reading  and  collating  establishment,  to  help 
in  editing  the  Fathers."  ^  Newman  seems  to  have  looked 
upon  this  house  as  a  home  for  "  young  Monks,"  and 
desired  that  his  plans  concerning  it  should  be  kept  as 
secret  as  possible.  His  friend,  Mr.  J.  W.  Bowden,  made  a 
contribution  towards  the  expenses  of  the  house,  and  to  him 
Newman  wrote,  on  January  17,    1838: — "Your  offering 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey ^  vol.  i.  p.  334. 

*  The  Anglican  Revival.     By  J.  H.  Overton,  D.D.,  p,  67.     London  :    1897. 

*  Mozley 's  Letters,  p.  78, 


90  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

towards  the  young  Monks  was  just  like  yourself,  and  I 
cannot  pay  it  a  better  compliment.  It  will  be  most 
welcome.  As  you  may  suppose,  we  have  nothing  settled, 
but  are  feeling  our  way.  We  should  begin  next  Term  ; 
but  since,  however  secret  one  may  wish  to  keep  it,  things  get 
out,  we  do  not  yet  wish  to  commit  young  men  to  any- 
thing which  may  hurt  their  chance  of  success  at  any 
College,  in  standing  for  a  fellowship."  ^ 

The  first  volume  of  the  now  well-known  Library  of  the 
Fathers  was  published  on  August  24,  1838,  and  the  last 
in  November  1885.  The  series  comprised  forty-eight 
volumes,  and  included  the  writings  of  thirteen  Fathers, 
translated  into  English.  It  is  remarkable  that  when,  nearly 
two  years  before  the  first  volume  was  issued,  that  well- 
known  Evangelical  and  thoroughly  Protestant  clergyman, 
the  Rev.  E.  Bickersteth,  heard  of  the  projected  Library  he 
wrote  enthusiastically  about  it  to  Pusey,  promising  to 
become  a  subscriber,  and  adding : — 

"Though  personally  unacquainted  with  you,  and  differing  in 
some  respects  from  views  which,  judging  from  the  volumes  of  the 
Oxford  Tracts,  I  suppose  you  hold,  I  cannot  but  write  a  few  lines 
to  express  the  sincere  pleasure  with  which  I  view  your  design,  in 
connection  with  Mr.  Keble  and  Mr.  Newman,  of  publishing  a  select 
Library  of  Fathers.  Few  things  could  be  more  seasonable,  or  more 
beneficial  to  the  Church  of  England."  ^ 

When  Mr.  Bickersteth  wrote  this  letter  he  probably 
expected  that  the  Library  would  include  all  the  Fathers  of 
the  first  three  centuries  at  least.  If  so,  he  must  have  been 
disappointed.  Of  the  thirteen  Fathers,  whose  writings 
were  translated,  only  three  wrote  in  the  first  three  centuries, 
the  remaining  ten  flourished  in  the  fourth,  fifth,  sixth,  and 
seventh  centuries.  It  is  well  known  that  during  the  latter 
periods  many  false  doctrines  crept  into  the  Church,  and 
the  tendency  of  the  early  Tractarians,  as  of  their  successors, 
the  Ritualists,  was  to  rely  chiefly  on  the  later  Fathers, 
rather  than  on  those  who  lived  near  Apostolic  times.  In 
1845  Bishop  (afterwards  Cardinal)  Wiseman  remarked,  on 

^  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  249. 
^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey ,  vol.  i.  p.  435. 


TRACTARIANS    AND    THE    FATHERS  9 1 

the  authority  of  Newman,  that  "  in  Pusey's  celebrated 
Sermon  on  the  Eucharist,  out  of  140  texts  of  Fathers 
only  four  are  from  the  first  three  centuries."  ^ 

There  is  a  very  interesting  passage  on  this  subject  in 
the  late  Lord  Selborne's  Memorials.  His  lordship,  I  may 
here  mention,  was  a  friend  of  the  early  Tractarians,  and  a 
sympathiser  with  their  religious  views  ;  but  he  afterwards 
became  an  opponent  of  the  advanced  section  of  the 
party  : — 

"  My  father,"  writes  Lord  Selborne,  "  once  said  to  my  brother 
William — repeating,  unless  I  am  mistaken,  some  words  of  Bishop 
Horsley,  who  knew  the  Fathers  well — that  '  the  Fathers  must  be 
read  with  caution.'  When  Isaac  Taylor,  in  his  Ancient  Christianity^ 
collected  out  of  the  Fathers  many  things  tending  to  disturb  the  ideal 
conception  of  a  golden  primitive  age  of  pure  faith  and  practice ;  and 
when  William  Goode,  afterwards  Dean  of  Ripon,  in  his  Divine  Rule 
of  Faith  and  Practice,  called  the  Fathers  themselves  as  witnesses  in 
favour  of  the  direct  use  of  Scripture  for  the  decision  of  controversies, 
some  of  those  who  placed  confidence  in  the  Oxford  Divines,  but  were 
themselves  ignorant  of  the  Fathers,  waited  anxiously  for  answers 
which  never  came.  I  remember  a  reply  once  made  to  myself,  when 
I  asked  whether  anybody  was  going  to  answer  Isaac  Taylor,  whose 
work  I  perceived  to  be  producing  in  some  quarters  a  considerable 
effect.  I  was  told  that  in  a  little  time  he  would  answer  himself, 
which  he  never  did.  It  seemed  plain  that,  although  the  advocates 
of  Patristic  authority  might  be  powerful  in  attack,  they  were  weak  in 
defence."  ^ 

The  Oxford  Movement  suffered  a  great  loss  by  the 
death,  on  February  28,  1836,  of  the  Rev.  Richard  Hurrell 
Froude,  at  the  early  age  of  33.  Young  as  he  was,  his 
influence  on  the  Oxford  Movement  was  next  only  to  that 
of  Keble  and  Newman.  At  the  time  of  his  death  he  had 
done  more  than  either  of  these  to  move  the  Tractarians  in 
a  Romeward  direction.  The  Rev.  Thomas  Mozley,  who 
was  personally  acquainted  with  Froude,  tells  us  that : — "  He 
was  a  High  Churchman  of  the  uncompromising  school, 
very  early  taking  part  with  Anselm,  Becket,  Laud,  and  the 

^  Life  and  Times  of  Cardinal  Wiseman,  vol.  i.  p.  434. 

"^Memorials  Family  and  Personal,  1766- 1865.  By  the  Earl  of  Selborne, 
vol.  i.  p.  210. 


92  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEV/ARD    MOVEMENT 

Nonjurors.  Woe  to  any  one  who  dropped  in  his  hearing 
such  phrases  as  the  Dark  Ages,  Superstition,  Bigotry, 
Right  of  Private  Judgment,  enHghtenment,  march  of  mind, 
or  progress."  ^  His  influence  on  Newman,  leading  him  to 
adopt  many  Roman  CathoHc  doctrines  and  practices,  was 
very  great.     Of  Froude,  Newman  writes : — 

"His  opinions  arrested  and  influenced  me,  even  when  they  did 
not  gain  my  assent.  He  professed  openly  his  admiration  of  the 
Church  of  Rome,  and  his  hatred  of  the  Reformers.  He  delighted 
in  the  notion  of  an  hierarchical  system,  of  sacerdotal  power,  and  of 
full  ecclesiastical  hberty.  He  felt  scorn  of  the  maxim,  '  The  Bible 
and  the  Bible  only  is  the  religion  of  Protestants ' ;  and  he  gloried  in 
accepting  Tradition  as  a  main  instrument  of  religious  teaching.  He 
had  a  high  severe  idea  of  the  intrinsic  excellence  of  Virginity ;  and 
he  considered  the  Blessed  Virgin  its  great  pattern.  He  delighted  in 
thinking  of  the  Saints ;  he  had  a  keen  appreciation  of  the  idea  of 
sanctity,  its  possibility  and  its  heights ;  and  he  was  more  than 
inclined  to  believe  a  large  amount  of  miraculous  interference  as 
occurring  in  the  early  and  Middle  Ages.  He  embraced  the  principle 
of  penance  and  mortification.  He  had  a  deep  devotion  to  the 
Real  Presence,  in  which  he  had  a  firm  faith.  He  was  powerfully 
drawn  to  the  Mediseval  Church,  but  not  to  the  Primitive.  ...  It 
is  difficult  to  enumerate  the  precise  additions  to  my  theological 
creed  which  I  derived  from  a  friend  to  whom  I  owe  so  much.  He 
made  me  look  with  admiration  towards  the  Church  of  Rome,  and 
in  the  same  degree  to  dislike  the  Reformation.  He  fixed  deep  in 
me  the  idea  of  devotion  to  the  Blessed  Virgin,  and  he  led  me 
gradually  to  believe  in  the  Real  Presence."^ 

We  thus  learn  that,  for  ten  years  at  least  before 
Newman  announced  his  secession  to  the  Papacy,  he  had 
"  looked  with  admiration  towards  the  Church  of  Rome," 
and  "  disliked  "  that  Protestant  Reformation  which,  while 
a  clergyman  in  the  Church  of  England,  he  did  his  best 
to  destroy.  It  is  evident  that  Newman's  heart  was  with 
Rome  many  years  before  he  left  the  Church  of  England. 
First  of  all,  at  the  very  commencement  of  the  Oxford 
Movement,  as  he  tells  us  : — "  I  learned  to  have  tender  feel- 
ings towards  her  [Church  of  Rome]  ;  but  still  my  reason 

^  Mozley's  Reminiscences  of  the  Oxford  Movejnent,  vol.  i.  p.  226. 
^  Newman's  Apologia  Pro  Vtia  Sua,  1st  edition,  pp.  85-87. 


NEWMAN'S    EARLY    LOVE    OF    ROME  93 

was  not  affected  at  all.  My  judgment  was  against  her, 
when  viewed  as  an  institution,  as  truly  as  it  had  ever  been. 
This  conflict  between  reason  and  affection  I  expressed  in 
one  of  the  early  Tracts,  published  July  1834  ...  As  a 
matter,  then,  of  simple  conscience,  though  it  went  against 
my  feelings,  I  felt  it  to  be  a  duty  to  protest  against  the 
Church  of  Rome  .  .  .  /  did  not  at  all  like  the  work.  H  urrell 
Froude  attacked  me  for  doing  it  ;  and  besides,  I  felt  that 
my  language  had  a  vulgar  and  rhetorical  look  about  it. 
I  believed,  and  really  measured  my  words  when  I  used 
them  ;  but  I  knew  that  I  had  a  temptation,  on  the  other 
hand,  to  say  against  Rome  as  much  as  ever  I  could,  in 
order  to  protect  myself  against  the  charge  of  Popery!'  ^ 

It  is  very  easy  to  persuade  ourselves  that  those  whom 
we  love  are  in  the  right,  and  most  unpleasant  to  say 
anything  against  them.  Newman's  affections  and  "  feel- 
ings "  w^ent  out  to  Rome  first,  and  after  a  time  his  reason 
followed  them.  There  are  many  in  a  similar  position 
at  the  present  time :  they  are  guided  by  feelings  instead 
of  reason  ;  by  what  they  like  rather  than  by  what  God 
requires  in  His  Holy  Word.  We  know  that  Newman 
kept  his  love  of  Rome  a  secret  from  the  public  for  several 
years  after  Froude's  death,  and  that  his  denunciations  of 
Romanism  were  largely  the  result  of  a  selfish  desire  to 
"  protect  himself  from  the  charge  of  Popery  "  which  was 
justly  brought  against  him.  How  could  any  man  be 
suspected  of  a  leaning  towards,  and  a  love  for,  Rome, 
who  wrote  against  her  as  Newman  did  ?  One  of  his 
intimate  friends,  and  a  former  curate  of  his,  the  Rev.  Isaac 
Williams,  says  : — "  I  have  lately  heard  it  stated  from  one 
of  Newman's  oldest  friends.  Dr.  Jelf,  that  his  mind  was 
always  essentially  Jesuitical." "  Before  the  public,  at  that 
time,  Newman  appeared  as  the  enemy  of  Rome,  while  at 
heart  and  in  secret  he  was  her  lover. 

Froude  had  written  three  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times. 
He  was  the  author  of  Tract  IX.,  on  "  Shortening  the 
Church    Service,"    in    which    he    expressed    the    opinion 

^  Newman's  Apologia  Pro  Vita  Sua,  1st  edition,  pp.  127,  128. 
^  Autobiography  of  Isaac  Williams,  p.  54. 


94  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

that  the  Church  services  were  already  short  enough ; 
and  affirmed  that  our  Reformers  "  added  to  the  Matin 
Service  what  had  hitherto  been  wholly  distinct  from  it, 
the  Mass  Service  or  Communion" — thus  implying  that 
the  "  Mass  "  and  "  Communion  "  were  identical.  He  also 
held  up  the  Church  of  Rome  to  the  admiration  of  his 
readers  because  she  had  retained  the  ''  primitive  mode 
of  worship,"  in  that  she  uses  the  Seven  Canonical  Hours 
of  Prayer  daily.  This  was  but  a  small  compliment  to 
the  Church  of  Rome,  but  it  was  a  compliment  never- 
theless, and  was  published  to  the  world  as  early  as 
October  31,  1833,  but  a  little  over  three  months  from 
the  birth  of  the  Oxford  Movement.  Trad  LIX.,  "  On  the 
Position  of  the  Church  of  Christ  in  England  Relatively 
to  the  State  and  Nation,"  was  also  written  by  Froude. 
In  it  he  tried  to  prove  that  the  Church  of  England  is 
suffering  from  greater  tyranny  from  the  State  than  in 
the  Dark  Ages.  "  It  cannot,"  he  asserts,  "  be  denied 
that  at  present  it  [Church  of  England]  is  treated  far 
more  arbitrarily,  and  is  more  completely  at  the  mercy 
of  the  chance  Government  of  the  day,  than  ever  our 
forefathers  were  under  the  worst  tyranny  of  the  worst 
times."  ^  The  author  argues  in  favour  of  what  he  terms 
"State  Protection"  and  against  "State  Interference" 
with  the  Church.  Under  the  first  of  these  heads,  how- 
ever (to  his  credit  be  it  recorded),  he  objects  to  "  the 
law  De  Excommunicato  Capiendo,  by  which  the  State 
engages  that  on  receiving  due  notice  of  the  excommuni- 
cation of  any  given  person,  he  shall  be  arrested  and  put 
in  prison  until  he  is  absolved."  This  he  justly  terms  "  a 
bad,  useless  law,  which  cannot  be  done  away  with  too 
soon."  ^  In  this  Tract  Froude  was  careful  not  to  let  his 
readers  know  all  that  he  believed  about  the  connection 
of  Church  and  State.  He  did  say  in  it  that  he  thought 
"  State  Interference "  with  the  Church  was  an  evil,  but 
he  did  not  tell  them  what  Newman  revealed  nearly 
twenty-eight  years  after  Froude's  death,  in  his  Apologia, 
"With  PYoude,  Erastianism — that    is,   the   union   (so   he 

1  Tract  LIX.,  p.  6.  2  73/^.  p_  3, 


FROUDE    ON    THE    ANCIENT    LITURGIES  95 

viewed  it)  of  Church  and  State — was  the  parent,  or  if 
not  the  parent,  the  serviceable  and  sufficient  tool,  of 
Liberalism.  Till  that  union  was  snapped.  Christian 
doctrine  could  never  be  safe."  ^  The  last  of  Froude's 
contributions  to  the  Tracts  for  the  Times  was  Tract  LXIIL, 
on  '<  The  Antiquity  of  the  Existing  Liturgies,"  in  which  he 
declared  of  those  ancient  documents,  that  "next  to  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  they  possess  the  greatest  claim  on  our 
veneration  and  study,^  thus  placing  them  above  the 
present  Liturgy  of  the  Reformed  Church  of  England  in 
her  Book  of  Common  Prayer.  He  was  careful  also  to 
point  out  that  all  of  those  Ancient  Liturgies,  which  have 
such  a  high  claim  on  our  "  veneration,"  contain  a  prayer 
"  for  the  rest  and  peace  of  all  those  who  have  departed 
this  life  in  God's  faith  and  fear"  ;  also  "A  sacrificial  obla- 
tion of  the  Eucharistic  bread  and  wine  "  ;  and  "  A  prayer 
of  consecration,  that  God  will  'make  the  bread  and  wine 
the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ.'  "  ^  The  tendency  of  this 
Tract  is  to  produce  the  impression  that  the  present 
Liturgy  of  the  Church  of  England,  because  it  does  not 
contain  either  of  the  features  just  mentioned,  is  not  of 
equal  value  with  those  extant  Ancient  Liturgies,  "  which 
possess  the  greatest  claims  on  our  veneration  and  study." 
It  must  be  sorrowfully  admitted  that  Froude's  exhortation 
to  "  study  "  these  ancient  documents  has  not  been  in  vain, 
and  that  the  studies  of  his  successors  have  not  been  con- 
fined to  the  portions  to  which  he  called  attention.  The 
Ritualists  of  the  present  day  do  study  the  Liturgies  of  the 
past,  but  they  prefer  to  imitate  those  which  were  in  use 
in  the  Church  of  Rome  during  the  darkest  period  of  the 
Dark  Ages  of  Christianity. 

The  opinions  expressed  by  Froude  in  the  Tracts  for  the 
Times  were  extremely  moderate,  when  compared  with 
others  which  he  held,  but  which  were  not  made  known 
to  the  public  until  after  his  death,  when  his  writings  were 
published  in  four  volumes,  edited  by  Keble  and  Newman. 
The  first  two  volumes  were  issued   in    1838,   the  others 

^  Apologia  Pro  Vita  Sua,  p.  107. 

2  Iract  LXIIL,  p.  16.  ^  Ibid.  p.  7. 


96  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

later  on,  under  the  general  title  of  Remains  of  the  late 
Reverend  Richard  Hurrell  Froude,  M.A.  The  public  interest 
in  these  volumes  mainly  centred  round  the  first,  which 
produced  a  profound  sensation  throughout  the  country, 
owing  to  the  startling  statements  in  favour  of  Roman 
doctrines  which  it  contained.  Until  then  no  one — outside 
the  Tractarian  party — seems  to  have  even  dreamt  that  it 
was  possible  that  one  of  the  chief  and  trusted  leaders  of 
the  Oxford  Movement  could  possibly  have  gone  so  far 
towards  Rome,  and  yet  retain  his  position  as  a  clergyman 
of  the  Reformed  Church  of  England.  I  subjoin  some 
extracts  from  his  "  Letters  to  Friends  "  in  the  order  in 
which  they  were  published.  The  italics  are  mine.  On 
August  31,  1833,  Froude  wrote  : — 

"  It  has  lately  come  into  my  head  that  the  present  state  of  things 
in  England  makes  a?i  opening  for  revising  the  Monastic  System.  I 
think  of  putting  the  view  forward  under  the  title  of  'Project  for 
reviving  Religion  in  great  towns.'  ...  I  must  go  about  the  country 
to  look  for  the  stray  sheep  of  the  true  fold ;  there  are  many  about  I 
am  sure ;  only  that  odious  Protestantism  sticks  in  people's  gizzard. 
I  see  Hammond  takes  that  view  of  the  infallibility  of  the  Churchy 
which  P.  says  was  the  old  one.  We  must  revive  it"  (vol.  i.  p. 
322). 

August,  1833. — "Since  I  have  been  at  home,  I  have  been  doing 
what  I  can  \.o  proselytise  in  an  under hatid  way"  (p.  322). 

September  16,  1833. — "  I  should  like  to  know  why  you  flinch  from 
saying  that  the  power  of  making  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  is 
vested  in  the  Successors  of  the  Apostles"  (p.  326). 

Novefnber  17,  1833. — "Is  it  expedient  to  put  forth  any  paper 
on  *the  doctrine  necessary  to  Salvation'?  I  am  led  to  question 
whether  Justification  by  Faith  is  an  integral  part  of  this  doctrine.  I 
have  not  breathed  this  to  a  soul  but  you,  and  express  myself  offhand. 
...  I  wish  you  could  get  to  know  something  of  S.  and  W.,  and 
un-ise,  un-Frotestantise,  un-Miltonise  them  "(p.  331). 

January  9,  1834. — "You  will  be  shocked  at  my  avowal,  that  I 
am  every  day  becoming  a  less  and  less  loyal  son  of  the  Reformation. 
It  appears  to  me  plain  that  in  all  matters  that  seem  to  us  indifferent  or 
even  doubtful,  we  should  conform  our  practices  to  those  of  the  Church 
which  has  preserved  its  traditionary  practices  unbroken.  We  can- 
not know  about  any  seemingly  indifferent  practice  of  the  Church  of 
Rome,  that  it  is  not  a  development  of  the  Apostolic  ethos  ;  and  it  is 


proude's  "remains"  97 

to  no  purpose  to  say  that  we  can  find  no  proof  of  it  in  the  writings 
of  the  six  first  centuries  "  (p.  336). 

August  22,  1834. — "If  you  are  determined  to  have  a  pulpit  in 
your  Church,  which  I  tuould  much  rather  be  withoiif,  do  put  it  at  the 
west  end  of  the  Church,  or  leave  it  where  it  is ;  every  one  can  hear 
you  perfectly,  and  what  can  they  want  more  ?  But  whatever yoti  do, 
pray  don't  let  it  stand  in  the  light  of  the  Altar,  which,  if  there  is  any 
truth  in  my  notions  of  Ordination,  is  fnore  sacred  than  the  Holy  of 
Holies  was  in  the  Jewish  Temple"  (p.  372). 

October,  1834. — "As  to  the  'R.eiormtr^,  I  think  worse  aftd  worse 
of  them.  Jewell  was  what  you  would  in  these  days  term  an  irrever- 
ent Dissenter.  His  Defence  of  the  Apology  disgusted  me  more  than 
almost  any  work  I  ever  read  "  (p.  379). 

December  26,  1834. — "When  I  get  your  letter  I  expect  a  rowing 
for  my  Roman  Catholic  sentiments.  Really  /  hate  the  Reformation 
and  the  Reformers  more  and  more  "  (p.  389). 

/anuary  1835. — "I  am  more  and  more  indignant  at  the  Pro- 
testant doctrine  on  the  subject  of  the  Eucharist,  and  think  that  the 
principle  on  which  it  is  founded  is  as  proud,  irreverent,  and  foolish 
as  that  of  any  heresy,  even  Socinianism"  (p,  391). 

January  1835.— "I  ^^all  never  call  the  Holy  Eucharist 'The 
Lord's  Supper,'  nor  God's  Priests  '  Ministers  of  the  Word,'  or  the 
Altar  'The  Lord's  Table,'  &c.,  &c. ;  innocent  as  such  phrases  are  in 
themselves,  they  have  been  dirtied ;  a  fact  of  which  you  seem 
oblivious  on  many  occasions.  Nor  shall  I  even  abuse  Roman 
Catholics  as  a   Church  for  anything    except   excommunicating  us" 

(P-  395)- 

February  25,  1835. — "The  Rural  Dean  and  the  Clergy  'went  a 
whoring '  after  the  Wesleyans,  Moravians,  and  the  whole  kit  besides, 
to  concoct  a  joint  plan  of  general  education  "  (p.  400). 

February  25,  1835. — "I  can  see  no  other  claim  which  the 
Prayer  Book  has  on  a  Layman's  deference,  as  the  teaching  of  the 
Church,  which  the  Breviary  and  Missal  have  not  in  a  far  higher 
degree^'  (p.  402). 

In  the  first  volume  of  Froude's  Remains  there  is  a 
chapter  headed,  "  Sayings  and  Doings."  Unfortunately, 
with  only  two  exceptions,  no  dates  are  mentioned  when 
these  sayings  were  uttered.  There  are  two  or  three  which 
are  against  Rome  to  a  certain  extent.  He  declared  : — 
"  I  never  could  be  a  Romanist  ;  I  never  could  think  all 
those  things  in  Pope  Pius'  Creed  necessary  to  salvation. 
But  I  do  not  see  what  harm  an  ordinary  Romanist  gets 

G 


98  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

from  thinking  so."  ^  On  another  occasion  he  termed  the 
Romanists,  "  wretched  Tridentines  everywhere."  ^  But, 
inasmuch  as,  only  one  year  before  his  death,  he,  as  we 
have  seen,  declared  that  he  would  never  "  abuse  Roman 
Catholics  as  a  Church  for  anything,  except  excommuni- 
cating us,"  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  his  anti-Roman 
sayings  must  have  been  uttered  some  considerable  time 
before  his  death.  Two  more  of  Froude's  sayings  may  be 
cited  here  : — "  I  wonder  a  thoughtful  fellow  like  H.  does 
not  get  to  hate  the  Reformers  faster."  "  The  Reformation 
was  a  limb  badly  set — it  must  be  broken  again  in  order 
to  be  righted."  ^ 

These  extracts  will  serve  to  make  my  readers  under- 
stand why  the  publication  of  Froude's  Remains  created 
such  a  stir  throughout  the  country.  Moderate  High 
Churchmen,  like  Samuel  Wilberforce,  deplored  their  publi- 
cation, as  likely  to  do  "  irreparable  injury."  *  Archdeacon 
Edward  Churton  said  that  one  result  of  the  Remains  was 
to  "  give  deep  offence  to  many  minds,  and  to  unsettle  the 
principles  of  many  more."  ^  They  were  edited  by  Keble 
and  Newman,  but  in  their  preface  to  the  first  volume  not 
one  word  of  censure  of  Froude's  disloyal  utterances  is  to 
be  found.  On  the  contrary,  the  editors  appear  therein 
as  his  apologists,  contenting  themselves,  by  way  of  caution, 
with  saying  in  the  mildest  possible  manner  : — "  It  can 
hardly  be  necessary  for  them  to  add,  what  the  name  of 
editor  implies,  that  while  they  of  course  concur  in  his 
[Froude's]  sentiments  as  a  whole,  they  are  not  to  be 
understood  as  rendering  themselves  responsible  for  every 
shade  of  opinion  or  expression."  ^  Pusey  hailed  the  publi- 
cation with  pleasure.  "  For  myself,"  he  said,  "  I  am  very 
glad  of  the  publication  of  the  Remains;  they  may  very 
likely  be  a  check,  but  that  in  itself  may  be  the  very  best 
thing  for  us,  and  prevent  a  too  rapid  and  weakening 
growth."  ^ 

But  the  Rev,  Dr.  Faussett,  Lady  Margaret's  Professor 

1  Froude's  Remains,  vol.  i.  p.  434.  "^  Ibid.  p.  434.         ^  Ibid.  pp.  434,  433. 

^  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  i.  p.  112. 

•^  Life  of  Joshua  Watson,  p.  270,  2nd  edition. 

"  Froude's  Remains,  vol.  i.  p.  xxii.  ^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  45. 


"THE    REVIVAL    OF    POPERY"  99 

of  Divinity  in  the  University  of  Oxford,  was  not  at  all 
pleased  with  the  publication  of  Froude's  Remains.  He 
felt,  and  rightly  felt,  that  the  work  was  calculated,  on  the 
whole,  to  glorify  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  to  disparage 
the  Church  of  England,  and  to  hold  up  to  public  con- 
tempt that  Protestantism  of  which  Englishmen  were  justly 
proud.  Accordingly,  he  determined  to  raise  his  voice  in 
the  University  pulpit,  not  only  against  the  Remains,  but 
also  against  certain  statements  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times, 
and  of  the  British  Critic,  of  which  at  that  time  Newman 
was  editor.  On  Sunday,  May  20,  1838,  Dr.  Faussett 
preached  before  the  University  of  Oxford  a  sermon  on 
The  Revival  of  Popery,  which  became  a  bombshell  in  the 
enemies'  camp.  It  was  subsequently  published  as  a  pam- 
phlet. The  text  selected  by  the  preacher  was  : — "  Come 
out  of  her,  my  people,  that  ye  be  not  partakers  of  her 
sins,  and  that  ye  receive  not  of  her  plagues  "  (Rev.  xviii. 
4).  He  first  of  all  directed  attention  to  the  revival  of 
genuine  Popery  in  the  country,  and  then  proceeded  to 
show  how  the  cause  of  Rome  was  being  assisted  by  certain 
trusted  leaders  of  the  Tractarians.  He  admitted  th;it  "  a 
few  unguarded  statements,  the  result  probably  of  indi- 
vidual haste  and  indiscretion,"  might  easily  have  been 
passed  over  without  ''  any  severity  of  censure." 

"But,"  he  added,  "when  they  assume  more  and  more  unequi- 
vocally the  marks  of  deliberation  and  design,  the  evidence  of 
numbers  and  of  combination ;  when  the  most  plausible  palliations 
of  Romish  corruption,  and  the  most  insidious  cavils  against  the 
wisdom,  and  even  in  some  measure  the  necessity,  of  the  Reforma- 
tion, find  their  way  into  the  periodical  and  popular  and  most  widely 
disseminated  literature  of  the  day ; — when  the  wild  and  visionary 
sentiments  of  an  enthusiastic  mind  [Froude's],  involving  in  their 
unguarded  expression  and  undisguised  preference  for  a  portion  at 
least  of  Papal  superstition,  and  occasionally  even  a  wanton  outrage 
on  the  cherished  feelings  of  the  sincere  Protestant — his  pious  affec- 
tion for  those  venerated  names  which  he  habitually  associates  with 
the  inestimable  blessings  of  the  Reformation — are  dragged  forth 
from  the  sanctuary  of  confidential  intercourse,  and  recommended  to 
the  public  as  a  '  witness  of  Catholic  views,'  and  '  to  speak  a  word  in 
season  for  the  Church  of  God ' ;  as  '  likely  to  suggest  thoughts  on 


lOO  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

doctrine,  on  Church  policy,  and  on  individual  conduct,  most  true 
and  most  necessary  for  these  times,'  and  as  '  a  bold  and  compre- 
hensive sketch  of  a  new  position '  for  the  Church  of  England ;  and 
this,  too,  under  circumstances  which  imply  the  concurrence  and 
approval,  and  responsibility  too,  of  an  indefinite  and  apparently 
numerous  body  of  friends  and  correspondents  and  editors  and 
reviewers ; — who  shall  any  longer  deny  the  imperative  necessity 
which  exists  for  the  most  decisive  language  of  warning  and  caution, 
lest  these  rash  projectors  of  a  new  position  for  our  Church  should  be 
unwarily  permitted  to  undermine  and  impair  her  old  and  approved 
defences."  ^ 

"  To  afifirm,"  said  the  preacher,  "  that  these  persons  are  strictly 
Papists,  or  tliat  within  certain  limits  of  their  own  devising  they  are 
not  actually  opposed  to  the  corruptions  and  the  Communion  of 
Rome,  would,  I  believe,  be  as  uncharitable  as  it  is  untrue.  But  who 
shall  venture  to  pronounce  them  safe  and  consistent  members  of 
the  Church  of  England  ?  and  who  shall  question  the  obvious  ten- 
dency of  their  views  to  Popery  itself?  For  if  by  some  happy  con- 
sistency they  are  themselves,  and  for  the  present,  saved  from  the 
natural  consequences  of  their  own  reasoning,  what  shall  we  hope 
for  the  people  at  large,  should  these  delusive  speculations  (which 
God  in  His  infinite  mercy  forbid)  extend  their  influence  beyond  the 
circle  (and  it  is  hoped  not  yet  a  very  extensive  circle)  of  educated 
men,  to  which  they  are  at  present  limited  ?  If  such  should  become 
the  ordinary  instruction  of  the  unwary  pastor  to  his  credulous  flock, 
what  shall  preserve  them  from  all  the  fascinations  and  idolatries  of 
the  Mass,  or  from  welcoming  with  open  arms  those  crafty  emissaries 
who  have  already  succeeded  to  such  a  fearful  extent  in  reimposing 
the  yoke  of  spiritual  bondage  on  the  neck  of  our  deluded  country- 
men? "2 

Dr.  Faussett  rendered  an  important  service  to  the 
Church  of  England  by  his  faithful  and  outspoken  sermon. 
Its  warnings  were  greatly  needed,  and  seem  to  us  now 
almost  prophetic.  All  that  he  foretold,  and  more  than  all, 
has  come  true  in  our  own  day,  and  to  an  extent  which 
Dr.  Faussett  never  could  have  anticipated.  He  proved 
his  case  by  numerous  quotations  from  the  writings  of  the 
men  whose  conduct  he  so  justly  denounced.  Of  course 
they  did  not  like  it.     Those  who  do  wrong  never  love  the 

1  The  Revival  of  Popery.  By  Godfrey  Faussett,  D.D.,  1st  edition,  pp.  13-15. 
Oxford:  Parker.     1838. 

2  Ibid.  p.  24, 


ATTACK    ON    THE   TRACTARIANS  10 1 

man  who  has  given  them  a  richly  deserved  castigation. 
Dr.  Faiissett's  was  not  the  first  pubHc  attack  on  the 
teaching  of  the  Tractarians,  but  it  was,  I  beheve,  the  first 
which  they  had  condescended  to  reply  to  publicly.  Of 
these,  perhaps,  the  most  noteworthy  was  that  written  by 
the  Rev.  Peter  Maurice,  Chaplain  of  New  and  All  Souls' 
College,  Oxford,  and  published  by  him  with  the  title  of 
Popery  in  Oxford,  in  1837.  He  declared  that  "an  attack 
is  made  by  this  newly  organised  system  [Tractarianism] 
upon  the  very  vitals  of  our  religion,  as  embodied  in  the 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,"  ^  and  he  brought  against  the 
party  a  charge  of  secrecy,  just  sixty  years  before  the 
publication  of  the  first  edition  of  my  Secret  History  of  the 
Oxfotd  Movement : — 

"We  find,"  he  said,  "a  party,  whom  nobody  knows,  though  every- 
body seems  to  pay  deference  to,  entering  into  a  combination,  and 
issuing  Tracts  in  the  capacity  of  '  Members  of  the  University  of 
Oxford,'  containing  the  most  absurd  statements  that  ever  issued 
from  any  body  of  educated  men,  addressed  to  the  clergy  as  well  as 
to  the  laity  as  if  they  were  vested  with  supernatural  powers ;  and 
moreover  (who  would  credit  it  ?)  suppressing  their  names" ^ 

"  What  are  the  names  of  these  our  Members  [of  the  University 
of  Oxford].  Let  them  he  announced,  that  we  may  know  them,  at 
least  by  name.  Had  I  not  found  Dr.  Pusey  there,  by  name,  I 
should  have  scorned  to  put  my  name  alongside  of  his.  I  fight  in 
the  daylight,  neither  with  small  nor  great,  but  with  those  only  who 
are  not  ashamed  of  their  doings."^ 

The  Islington  Evangelical  clergy  censured  the  Tract- 
arians. Writing  on  January  6,  1837,  Mr.  Dodsworth 
(one  of  the  Tractarians)  said :  ''  I  hear  that  there  was  a 
most  violent  and  abusive  attack  on  us  at  a  meeting  of 
clergy  at  Islington  yesterday,  and  great  alarm  expressed 
at  the  spread  of  High  Church  principles,  which  they  did 
not  scruple  to  denounce  as  heretical."  *  Later  on  in  the 
same  year  Archdeacon  Spooner,  of  Coventry,  in  charging 
the  clergy  of  his  Archdeaconry,  denounced  the  Tracts  for 

1  Popery  in  Oxford.     By  Peter  Maurice,  M.A.,  p.  4.     London  :  1837. 

2  Ibid.  p.  4.  3  73/^.  p.  II. 
*  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  12. 


102  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

the  Tunes  in  vigorous  terms.  To  him  belongs  the  honour 
of  giving  utterance  to  the  first  official  condemnation  of 
the  Oxford  Movement.  Pusey  wrote  to  the  Archdeacon 
a  private  letter  of  remonstrance,  which  brought  back  a 
reply,  in  the  course  of  which  the  Archdeacon  disclaimed 
any  intention  of  imputing  any  intentional  dishonesty  to 
the  writers  of  the  Tracts,  but  adding  that  he  believed  that 
"  the  respectable  and  learned  authors  of  those  Tracts  were, 
unawares  to  themselves,  injuring  the  pure  and  Scriptural 
doctrines  of  the  Protestant  faith."  ^  At  about  this  time 
the  Bishop  of  Oxford  received  so  many  letters  of  com- 
plaint against  the  Tractarians  that  he  felt  it  necessary  to 
write  to  Dr.  Pusey  on  the  subject,  asking  him  for  an  ex- 
planation. This  Dr.  Pusey  gave  in  a  long  letter,  dated 
September  26,  1837,  in  which  he  specially  dealt  with  the 
charges  brought  against  his  friends  by  Mr.  Peter  Maurice, 
whose  book  on  Popery  in  Oxford  had  by  this  time  caused 
a  great  stir  throughout  the  country,  and  had  been  quoted 
by  Canon  G.  Stanley  Faber,  of  Durham,  in  a  Charge 
which  he  delivered  to  the  clergy.  The  charges  brought 
against  Mr.  Newman  and  his  friends  by  Mr.  Maurice 
were  :  (i)  Needless  bowings  ;  (2)  turning  to  the  East  while 
reading  certain  prayers  ;  (3)  the  use  of  a  Credence  Table; 
and  (4)  the  use  of  a  stole  with  embroidered  crosses.  Dr. 
Pusey  did  not  deny  the  truth  of  either  of  these  charges, 
excepting  the  first,  stating  that  there  had  been  "  no 
bowings,  except  at  the  name  of  our  Lord "  ;  as  to  the 
other  charges  he  endeavoured  to  prove  that  they  were 
directed  against  lawful  practices.  But,  inasmuch  as  he 
was  writing  a  private  letter  to  his  Bishop,  Dr.  Pusey 
was  not  ashamed  to  unjustly  slander  an  opponent  in  his 
letter : — 

"The  reports,"  against  his  friends,  he  informs  his  lordship, 
"  began  with  a  Mr.  Maurice,  a  Chaplain  of  New  College,  who  seems 
a  very  excited  and  vain  and  half-bewildered  person,  who  seems  to 
think  that  he  is  called  by  God  to  oppose  what  he  calls  the  Popery 
of  Oxford.     He  published  a  heavy  pamphlet,  which  would  have 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  14. 


NEWMAN'S    REPLY    TO    FAUSSETT  103 

died  a  natural  death  had  not  the  Christian  Observer  wished  to  have 
a  blow  at  Mr,  Newman  and  the  '  High  Church,'  and  so  taken  it  up 
though  with  a  sort  of  protest  against  identifying  itself  with  Mr. 
Maurice's  language ;  and  thence,  I  am  sorry  to  say,  Mr.  Townsend, 
Prebendary  of  Durham,  has  repeated  it  in  a  '  Charge  to  the  Clergy 
of  the  Peculiar  of  N.  AUerton  and  Allertonshire.' "  ^ 

After  all,  this  ''  very  excited  and  vain  and  half- 
bewildered  person,"  as  Pusey  insultingly  termed  Mr. 
Maurice,  had  only  told  the  truth.  I  had  the  pleasure 
of  Mr.  Maurice's  personal  acquaintance  many  years  later, 
and  found  in  him  no  trace  of  being  either  a  "  vain  "  or  a 
"half-bewildered  person."  Down  to  his  death,  at  an 
advanced  age,  he  was  ever  foremost  in  exposing  the 
misdeeds  of  the  Romanisers.  His  two  volumes  on  The 
Ritualists  or  Non-Natural  Catholics,  now  long  since  out  of 
print,  contain  a  considerable  quantity  of  useful — though 
badly-arranged — information  concerning  the  history  of 
the  Oxford  Movement,  to  be  found  nowhere  else.  ^ 

Though  the  Tractarians  were  much  annoyed  at  these 
criticisms,  they  were  careful  to  abstain  as  far  as  possible 
from  taking  public  notice  of  anything  said  against  them. 
But  when  Dr.  Faussett  publicly  denounced  them  in  such 
vigorous  terms  from  the  University  pulpit,  and  held  them 
up  to  the  reprobation  of  all  loyal  Churchmen,  they  could 
keep  silence  no  longer.  His  sermon  was  not  published 
until  June  21st,  and  yet  before  the  next  day  was  over 
Newman  had  written  a  reply  of  104  pages.  It  was  a 
calmly  written  and  clever  document,  in  which  all  the 
subtlety  for  which  he  was  famous  seems  to  have  been 
called  into  action.  He  complains  much  of  Dr.  Faussett 
that,  in  his  sermon,  he  had  not  proved  that  the  opinions 
and  practices  he  condemned  were  "  inconsistent  with  the 
doctrines  of  our  Church."  ^  Newman  here  very  con- 
veniently chose  to  forget  that  Dr.  Faussett  was  addressing 
men  whom  he  knew  to  be  already  (with  but  few  excep- 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  pp.  14,  15. 

^  The  Ritualists  or  Non- Natural  Catholics.  By  the  Rev.  Peter  Maurice,  D.D. 
London  :  J.  F.  Shaw  &  Co.,  pp.  xxiv.  and  191.  Sequel  to  the  Ritualists.  By  the 
Rev.  Peter  Maurice,  D.D.,  p.  188.     Yarnton  :  1875. 

^  A  Letter  to  the  Rev.  Godfrey  Faussett,  D.D.,  on  Certain  Points  of  Faith  and 
Practice,     By  the  Rev.  J.  H.  Newman,  B.D.,  2nd  edition,  1838,  p.  6. 


104  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

tions)  convinced  that  the  doctrines  and  practices  censured 
were  inconsistent  with  the  doctrines  of  the  Church  of 
England.  He  had  no  need  to  stop  and  argue  the  case 
with  men  who  were  already  convinced.  His  object  was 
to  expose  a  subtle  attempt  to  revive  Popery  in  the  Church 
of  England,  and  in  proof  of  the  existence  of  such  an 
attempt  he  gave  ample  extracts  from  Froude's  Remains,  the 
Tracts  for  the  Times,  and  the  British  Critic.  It  was  simply 
impossible,  in  the  course  of  the  sermon,  to  give  the  proof 
demanded.  Newman  certainly  had  a  point  against  his 
opponent  when  he  complained  that  he  had  not  cited  what 
Froude  had  written  against  the  Church  of  Rome.  Not 
that  Newman  had  much  to  gain  from  those  passages, 
which  had  been  specially  cited  by  the  editors  of  the 
Remains  in  their  preface.  Bishop  (afterwards  Cardinal) 
\yiseman,  in  the  Dublin  Revieiv,  commenting  on  the  argu- 
ment sought  to  be  built  on  these  anti-Roman  utterances 
of  Froude,  justly  remarks  : — 

"  We  think  we  are  justified  in  saying  that  proofs  of  Mr.  Froude's 
disinclination  to  Catholicity  must  have  been  very  scarce,  for  the 
editors  to  have  been  induced  to  bring  together  these  superficial 
observations,  made  during  a  brief  residence  in  a  Catholic  city,  not 
generally  reputed  one  of  the  most  edifying.  These,  however,  will 
not  bear  comparison  with  the  growing  and  expanding  tendency  of 
his  mind  towards  everything  Catholic ;  and  we  cannot  help  feeling, 
as  we  peruse  his  later  declarations,  that  the  passages  brought  so 
prominently  forward  by  his  editors,  would  have  been  among  those 
which,  dying,  he  would  have  wished  to  blot."  ^ 

There  is  an  interesting  statement  by  Newman  at  page 
25  of  his  pamphlet,  in  which  he  declares  that : — "  It  is 
idolatry  to  bow  down  to  any  emblem  or  symbol  as  divine 
which  God  Himself  has  not  appointed ;  and  since  He  has 
not  appointed  the  worship  of  images,  such  worship  is 
idolatrous  ;  though  how  far  it  is  so,  whether  in  itself  or  in 
given  individuals,  we  may  be  unable  to  determine."  He 
then  proceeds  to  argue  at  considerable  length  in  favour  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  Real  Presence,  though  he  repudiates 

^  Cardinal  Wiseman's  Essays  on  'furious  Subjects,  vol.  ii.  p.  80. 


"OUR    ANCIENT    MOTHER"  105 

Transubstantiation.  He  denies  that  the  Church  of  Rome 
is  "  the  mother  of  harlots,"  but  terms  her  "  our  ancient 
Mother."  ^  As  to  "  the  rite  of  the  Roman  Church,  or  St. 
Peter's  Liturgy,"  he  terms  it  a  "  sacred  and  most  precious 
monument,"  ^  and  adds  : — 

"  Well  was  it  for  us  that  they  [the  Reformers]  did  not  discard  it, 
that  they  did  not  touch  any  vital  part ;  for  through  God's  good 
providence,  though  they  broke  it  up  and  cut  away  portions,  they  did 
not  touch  life ;  and  thus  we  have  it  at  this  day,  a  violently  treated, 
but  a  holy  and  dear  possession,  more  dear  perhaps  and  precious 
than  if  it  were  in  its  full  vigour  and  beauty,  as  sickness  or  infirmity 
endear  us  to  our  friends  and  relatives."  ^ 

This  was,  of  course,  equivalent  to  asserting  that  the 
Communion  Service  of  the  Church  of  England  is  not  in  a 
state  of  spiritual  "  vigour  and  beauty " ;  but  rather  in  a 
state  of  "  sickness  or  infirmity  " — thus  showing  clearly 
how  much  Newman  admired  the  Church  of  Rome's  Mass 
Book.  Of  course  he  repudiated  Dr.  Faussett's  assertion 
that  the  work  of  himself  and  his  friends  tended  to  a 
"  Revival  of  Popery,"  and  was  calculated  to  lead  men  to 
Rome.  Yet  within  little  more  than  seven  years  he  prac- 
tically proved  the  charge  by  seceding  to  Rome  himself  ; 
and  it  is  the  biographer  of  Dr.  Pusey  who  tells  us  that 
"  to  Newman  himself,  when  a  Roman  Catholic,  the 
Movement  seemed  to  have  been  a  steady  impulse  towards 
Rome."  *  In  his  Letter  to  Dr.  Fanssett  Newman  did  not 
censure  any  of  Froude's  extravagant  statements. 

Dr.  Hook  was  at  that  time  Vicar  of  Leeds,  where  he 
was  busily  engaged  in  promoting  High  Church  principles. 
It  was  his  boast  that  he  had  learned  and  accepted  Tract- 
arian  doctrines  before  the  commencement  of  the  Tract- 
arian  Movement.  Later  on  in  life  he  came  into  direct 
conflict  with  the  advanced  party,  whom  he  boldly  charged 
with  Romanising ;  indeed,  the  first  indication  of  disagree- 
ment came  out  in  connection  with  the  publication  of 
Froude's  Remains.  In  August  1838  Hook  was  selected 
by  the  Bishop  of  Ripon  (Dr.  C.  T.  Longley)  to  preach  the 

^  Newman's  Letter  to  Dr.  Faussett,  p.  33.  ^  Ibid.  p.  46. 

3  Ibid.  p.  47.  ■*  Life  of  Dr.  Fuse)',  vol.  ii.  p.  80. 


I06  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

sermon  at  his  Primary  Visitation,  and  soon  afterwards  he 
published  it.  He  availed  himself  of  the  opportunity  to 
add  some  lengthy  notes  to  it,  in  which  he  dealt  with  the 
Tracts  for  the  Times,  Fronde's  Remains,  and  Dr.  Faussett's 
sermon  on  The  Revival  of  Popery.  For  the  two  former  he 
had  a  mixture  of  praise  and  blame  ;  but  for  the  latter 
nothing  but  unmixed  censure  and  vulgar  personal  insult 
and  abuse.     As  to  the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  he  said: — 

'*  Against  some  of  the  pious  opinions  supported  in  these  Tracts 
objections  may  occasionally  be  raised,  for  perfect  coincidence  of 
opinion  is  not  to  be  expected.  I  do  not,  myself,  accord  with  all  the 
opinions  expressed  in  them,  or  always  admit  the  deduction  attempted 
to  be  drawn  from  the  principles  on  which  we  are  agreed.  I  think, 
too,  that  while  manfully  vindicating  the  principles  of  the  English  Re- 
formation, in  their  fear  lest  they  should  appear  to  respect  persons  too 
highly,  the  writers  of  the  Tracts  do  not  appreciate  highly  enough  the 
character  of  some  of  our  leading  Reformers,  or  make  due  allowance 
for  the  difficulties  in  which  they  were  placed.  ...  I  am  not  one  of 
those  who  would  say,  '  Read  the  Oxford  Tracts,  and  take  for  granted 
every  opinion  there  expressed,'  but  I  am  one  of  those  who  would 
say,  *  Read  and  digest  those  Tracts  well,  and  you  will  have  imbibed 
principles  which  will  enable  you  to  judge  of  opinions.'  "^ 

As  to  Froude's  Remains,  and  Dr.  Faussett's  sermon, 
Dr.  Hook  gave  his  opinion  in  one  lengthy  paragraph : — 

"  The  present  discourse,"  he  said,  "  is  sufficient  to  show  that  I 
am  not,  any  more  than  Dr.  Faussett,  inclined  to  approve  of  Mr. 
Froude's  Remains,  I  deeply,  indeed,  regret  the  publication  of  that 
work  without  a  protest,  on  the  part  of  the  editor,  against  some  of 
the  author's  paradoxical  positions.  With  a  kind  heart  and  glowing 
sensibilities,  Mr.  Froude  united  a  mind  of  wonderful  power,  saturated 
with  learning,  and,  from  its  very  luxuriance,  productive  of  weeds, 
together  with  many  flowers  .  .  .  from  many  of  his  opinions  the 
majority  of  his  readers  will,  like  myself,  dissent.  But  if,  in  con- 
templating the  evils  inseparable  from  a  great  movement,  he  does 
not  sufficiently  appreciate,  and  I  think  he  does  not,  the  wisdom  of 
our  Reformation,  or  the  virtues  of  many  of  our  Reformers ;  if  while 
condemning  the  Romish  he  censures  the  English  Church ;  still, 
while  we  think  him  to  be  in  error  in  these  particulars,  we  may  do 

1  A  Call  to  Uniott  on  the  P7-inciples  of  the  English  Reformation,  By  W^alter 
Farquhar  Hook,  D.D.,  2nd  edition,  pp.  108-110.     London:   1S38. 


DK.    hook's    sermon    ON    UNION  1 07 

SO  without  condemning  him  by  wholesale; — still  less  ought  those 
persons  to  condemn  him  for  not  fully  appreciating  our  Reformation, 
who,  like  Mr.  Scott,  consider  the  work  of  the  Reformers,  in  retain- 
ing our  present  Baptismal  Service,  *a  burden  hard  to  bear,'  'an 
absurdity  which  they  did  not  believe  in  their  hearts.'  Had  Dr. 
Faussett  contented  himself  with  having  written  a  pamphlet  or  a 
review,  while  we  might  have  considered  him  incompetent  to  sit  in 
judgment  on  such  a  mind  as  Mr.  Froude's,  we  should  have  had 
no  cause  of  complaint.  But  cause  of  complaint  the  Church  has 
when  he  makes  one  work  a  pretext  for  attacking  certain  of  his 
clerical  brethren,  whose  learning  he  may  be  unable  to  appreciate, 
but  whose  piety  and  zeal  he  would  do  well  to  imitate ;  when  he  uses 
the  pulpit  to  compel  that  attention  to  himself  which  he  could  not 
secure  from  the  press."  ^ 

Hook's  sermon  pleased  nobody  altogether.  His 
Oxford  friends  were  bitterly  disappointed.  On  receiving 
a  copy  of  it  Pusey  wrote  to  Newman  in  sorrowful  tones : — 
"  I  send  you  Hook's  sermon,  which  Parker  brought  me 
to-day,  to  read  in  your  way  back  ;  it  shows  me  that  my 
letters  have  been  wasted  upon  him,  for  he  will  neither 
say  one  thing  nor  the  other  ;  not  say  wherein  he  disagrees, 
and  yet  say  that  he  does  disagree.  However,  what  he 
does  say  will  do  good,  and  perhaps  keep  some  young  ones 
quiet.  What  he  says  about  Froude  is  as  much  as  you 
could  expect."  ^ 

In  the  month  of  July  1838,  the  Bishop  of  Oxford 
(Dr.  Bagot)  delivered  his  third  Visitation  Charge,  which 
greatly  disturbed  Newman,  when  he  read  a  report  of  it  in 
an  Oxford  paper.  Indeed  he  was  so  upset  that  he  de- 
termined to  give  up  publishing  any  more  Tracts  for  the 
Times,  under  the  impression,  as  he  told  Pusey,  that  "  an 
indefinite  censure  was  cast  over  the  Tracts"  by  the 
Bishop's  Charge.  Pusey  also  was  troubled  : — "  It  is,"  he 
wrote  to  Newman,  ''not  simply  disheartening  ;  it  seems  like 
a  blow  from  which  I  shall  never  live  to  see  things  recover."^ 
Pusey  entered  into  a  correspondence  with  the  Bishop  on 
the  subject.  His  lordship  said  that  he  hoped  the  Tracts 
would  not  be  given  up,  and  he  felt  sure  that  when  Pusey 

^  Hook's  Call  to  Union,  pp.  167,  168.  ^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  66. 

3  Ibid.  pp.  53,  54. 


I08  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

read  what  he  had  said  in  his  pubHshed  Charge,  he  would 
form  a  different  judgment.  When  the  Charge  did  appear 
in  print,  Pusey  was  surprised,  and  wrote  to  the  Bishop: — 
"  What  your  lordship  says  about  our  Tracts  looks  different 
from  what  it  did  when  extracted  and  put  forth  by  the 
Oxford  Journal  and  the  like.  I  need  hardly  say  to  your 
lordship  that  I  am,  for  myself,  perfectly  satisfied,  grateful 
for  your  lordship's  advice,  and  for  the  warning  to  those 
who  are  more  or  less  our  pupils."  ^  I  have  not  been  able 
to  see  the  report  of  the  Bishop's  Charge  as  it  appeared 
in  the  Oxford  Journal;  but  certainly  as  it  appeared  in 
pamphlet  form,  and  as  issued  by  the  Bishop  himself, 
Newman  and  Pusey  had  little  or  nothing  to  complain  of, 
but,  on  the  contrary,  a  great  deal  to  be  thankful  for. 
The  fact  is  that  Dr.  Bagot  was,  at  this  time,  a  great 
admirer  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  and,  so  far  as  I  can 
ascertain,  he  was  the  first  Bishop  in  England  who  publicly 
said  a  good  word  in  their  favour.  These  were  the  Bishop's 
words  as  issued  by  himself : — 

"  With  reference  to  errors  ift  doctrine,  which  have  been  imputed 
to  the  series  of  publications  called  the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  it  can 
hardly  be  expected  that,  on  an  occasion  like  the  present,  I  should 
enter  into,  or  give  a  handle  to  anything  which  might  hereafter  tend 
to  controversial  discussions.  Into  controversy  I  will  not  enter. 
But,  generally  speaking,  I  may  say  that  in  these  days  of  lax  and 
spurious  liberality,  anything  which  tends  to  recall  forgotten  truths  is 
vahiable :  and  where  these  publications  have  directed  men's  minds 
to  such  important  subjects  as  the  union,  discipline,  and  the  authority 
of  the  Church,  I  think  they  have  done  good  service ;  but  there  may 
be  some  points  in  which,  perhaps,  from  ambiguity  of  expression,  or 
similar  causes,  it  is  not  impossible,  but  that  evil  rather  than  the 
intended  good  may  be  produced  on  minds  of  a  peculiar  temperament. 
I  have  more  fear  of  the  Disciples  than  of  the  Teachers.  In  speaking 
therefore  of  the  authors  of  the  Tracts  in  question,  I  would  say  that 
I  think  their  desire  to  restore  the  ancient  discipline  of  the  Church 
most  praiseworthy ;  I  rejoice  in  their  attempts  to  secure  a  stricter 
attention  to  the  Rubrical  directions  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer; 
and  I  heartily  approve  the  spirit  which  would  restore  a  due  ob- 
servance of  the  Fasts  and  Festivals  of  the  Church  :  but  I  would 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  62. 


THE  OXFORD  MARTYRS'  MEMORIAL        109 

implore  them,  by  the  purity  of  their  intentions,  to  be  cautious,  both 
in  their  writings  and  actions,  to  take  heed  lest  their  good  be  evil 
spoken  of;  lest  in  their  exertions  to  re-establish  unity,  they  un- 
happily create  fresh  schism ;  lest  in  their  admiration  of  antiquity, 
they  revert  to  practices  which  heretofore  have  ended  in  superstition."  ^ 

It  will  be  observed  that  in  this  statement  the  Bishop  did 
not  censure  the  writers  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times  for  any- 
thing they  had  written  ;  he  only  expressed  his  fears  lest  in 
ihe  future  they  should  go  too  far  in  the  direction  of  super- 
stition ;  and  for  his  words  of  warnings  of  danger  he 
received,  as  we  have  seen,  the  thanks  of  Pusey.  Instead 
of  censuring  the  Tracts  which  had  appeared,  he  praised 
them  highly  ;  and  in  order  to  prevent  any  misconception 
as  to  his  meaning,  in  a  footnote  to  the  second  edition  of 
his  Charge  the  Bishop  wrote  : — "  As  I  have  been  led  to 
suppose  that  the  above  passage  [cited  above]  has  been 
misunderstood,  I  take  this  opportunity  of  stating,  that  it 
never  was  my  intention  therein  to  pass  any  general  censure 
on  the  Tracts  for  the  Times."  When  the  Bishop  delivered 
his  Charge  churchmen  everywhere  were  talking  about 
Froude's  Remains,  its  denunciation  of  the  Reformers,  and 
its  praise  of  what  ordinary  persons  called  Popery.  But 
on  this  burning  subject  the  Bishop  said  nothing.  His 
silence,  under  such  circumstances,  was  worthy  of  severe 
censure. 

There  was  one  result  of  the  publication  of  Froude's 
Remains  which  its  editors  never  anticipated.  It  led  to  the 
erection  of  the  Martyrs'  Memorial  at  Oxford,  in  memory  of 
Cranmer,  Ridley,  and  Latimer,  who  were  burnt  alive  in 
that  city.  A  prospectus  of  the  proposed  Memorial,  issued 
in  1838  by  the  Heads  of  Houses  in  Oxford,  stated 
that  it  was  intended  to  be  "  A  public  testimony  of  respect 
for  the  principles  of  the  Reformation,  and  veneration  for 
the  personal  character  of  the  Martyred  Bishops."  When 
Pusey  first  heard  of  the  scheme,  he  exclaimed  that  it  "  is 
nothing  but  a  cut  at  us  1"  ^     It  certainly  placed   Pusey, 

^  A   Charge  delivered  to  the  Clergy  of  the  Diocese  of  Oxford.      By  Richard 
Bagot,  D.D.,  Bishop  of  Oxford,  2nd  edition,  pp.  20,  21.     1838. 
-  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  64. 


no  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Newman,  and  Keble,  and  their  friends  in  a  very  awkward 
and  uncomfortable  position.  They  dreaded  the  pubhc 
odium  which  would  inevitably  fall  upon  them  if  they  refused 
altogether  to  have  anything  to  do  with  the  Memorial;  and 
yet  they  hated  the  whole  scheme  with  all  their  hearts. 
Pusey  informed  Keble  that  he  "  had  spoken  strongly  lately 
against  the  Memorial,  as  perhaps  falling  within  the  scope  of 
onr  Lord's  words  against  '  building  the  sepulchres  of  those 
whom  their  fathers  had  slain,'  and  AS  UNKIND  TO  THE 
Church  of  Rome,  in  throwing  a  hindrance  to  her  reform- 
ing herself  and  healing  the  schism."  -^  It  makes  one  justly 
indignant  to  see  tender  consideration  thus  shown  towards 
the  criminal,  and  none  at  all  for  her  innocent  victims.  If 
Rome  had  ever  repented  of  her  crimes  in  burning  the 
Marian  Martyrs,  it  might  have  been  "  unkind  "  to  remind 
her  of  her  former  misdeeds  ;  but  she  never  has  repented, 
or  ever  expressed  a  single  word  of  regret  for  burning  alive 
in  Mary's  reign,  five  Bishops,  twenty-one  divines,  eight  gen- 
tlemen, eighty-four  artificers,  one  hundred  husbandmen, 
twenty-six  wives,  twenty  widows,  nine  virgins,  two  boys, 
and  two  infants.  The  fact  is  that  the  Tractarians  had  no 
real  respect  for  the  Reformers,  and  some  of  them  doubted 
whether  they  were  Martyrs  at  all.  "  I  cannot,"  said  Keble, 
"  understand  how  poor  Cranmer  could  be  reckoned  a  bona 
fide  Martyr  according  to  the  rules  of  the  Primitive  Church. 
Was  he  not  an  unwilling  sufferer?  and  did  he  not  in  the  very 
final  paper  of  his  confession  profess  to  hold  in  all  points 
the  doctrine  of  that  Answer  to  Gardiner?  And  is  not  that 
doctrine  such  as  the  ancient  Church  would  have  called 
heretical?"  ^  So  Cranmer  was  nothing  better  than  a  heretic,  in 
Keble's  estimation,  and,  therefore,  not  a  Martyr  at  all !  One 
who  was  at  that  time  a  prominent  Tractarian  (the  Rev. 
Thomas  Mozley),  subsequently  wrote  : — "  I  have  to  own 
that,  in  spite  of  the  telling  illustrations  of  Mrs.  Trimmer's 
History  of  England,  I  have  never  yet  succeeded  in  getting 
up  an  atom  of  affection  or  respect  for  the  three  gentle- 
men canonised  in  the  '  Martyrs'  Memorial '  at  Oxford.    As 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  69. 
'  Ibid.  p.  71. 


"CRANMER  BURNT  WELL"  III 

Lord  Blachford  once  observed  to  me,  '  Cranmer  burnt 
well/  and  that  is  all  the  good  I  know  about  him."  ^  What 
Froude  thought  about  the  Reformers  I  have  already  cited. 
And  Keble  declared : — ''  Anything  which  separates  the 
present  Church  from  the  Reformers  I  should  hail  as  a 
great  good."  ^  And  even  Dean  Church,  when,  in  later 
years,  he  wrote  his  book  on  The  Oxford  Movement,  went  so 
far  as  to  declare : — "  It  is  safe  to  say  that  the  Divines  of 
the  Reformation  never  can  be  again,  with  their  confessed 
Calvinism,  with  their  shifting  opinions,  their  extravagant 
deference  to  the  foreign  oracles  of  Geneva  and  Zurich, 
their  subservience  to  bad  men  in  power,  the  heroes  and 
saints  of  Churchmen."  ^  It  is  evident  that  men  who  wrote 
like  this,  had  they  lived  in  the  Reformation  period,  never 
would  have  led  a  movement  against  Rome  leading  to 
secession  from  her  communion. 

Newman  and  his  friends  soon  found  that  it  was  impos- 
sible to  stop  the  proposed  Memorial  ;  and  therefore  they 
directed  their  energies  to  a  vain  attempt  to  spoil  it.  Pusey 
was  not  at  all  pleased  when  he  heard  that  Dr.  Sewell  talked 
of  placing  on  the  Memorial  an  inscription  bearing  the 
expression  "  Martyrs  for  the  Truth."  Mr.  Churton  pro- 
posed that  the  Memorial  should  take  the  form  of  a  new 
Church  ;  but  Pusey  on  this  point  said  that  "  it  must  not 
be  the  Martyrs'  Church,  canonising  them."  *  He  thought 
that  the  proposed  new  Church  "  must  be  called  after  some 
one  already  canonised,  not  by  individuals."  We  thus  see 
that  Pusey  had  no  objection  to  honouring  in  this  way 
some  one  canonised  by  the  Pope,  which  was  an  indirect 
way  of  acknowledging  the  Pope's  power  to  canonise.  On 
this  point  one  of  the  biographers  of  Keble  informs  us  that 
that  gentleman,  in  one  of  his  sermons,  asserted  of  English 
Churchmen  that  "  zve  are  free  to  reverence  all  Saints  of 
the  Roman  Communion."  ^ 

The  Oxford  Protestant  Magazine  for  1848,  in  some  valu- 

^  Renmiiscences  of  the  Oxford  Moveriient,  vol.  ii.  p.  230. 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  71. 

^  Church's  Oxford  Movement,  p.  39,  ist  edition. 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  66. 

^  Jolui  Keble.     By  Walter  Lock.  M.  A.,  p.  149. 


112  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

able  "  Hints  towards  a  History  of  Puseyism,"  thus  refers 
to  the  hindrances  thrown  in  the  way  of  the  suggested 
Martyrs'  Memorial : — 

"  The  originators  and  promoters  of  this  design  met  with  almost 
insurmountable  obstacles.  Their  design,  and  the  methods  they 
adopted,  were  alike  carped  at.  At  a  public  meeting  held  in  full 
term,  in  February  1839,  not  more  than  two  hundred  persons  were 
present,  and  among  these  were  some  who,  while  professing  to  sup- 
port the  measure,  cavilled  and  censured,  and  pronounced  it  a  failure. 
Such  was  Mr.  Greswell,  the  Oxford  Chairman  of  Mr.  Gladstone's 
Committee  at  the  late  election.  Mr.  Greswell,  besides  describing 
the  movement  as  a  'perfect  failure,'  ;j^20oo  only  having  been  pro- 
mised, also  strongly  objected  to  the  use  of  the  word  '  Protestant '  as 
applied  to  the  Church  ;  '  the  word,'  he  said,  '  was  not  to  be  found  in 
the  Prayer  Book.'  Cranmer,  he  thought,  ought  not  to  be  praised, 
but  recorded  as  a  penitent."  ^ 

The  Bishop  of  Oxford  paid  a  special  visit  to  Pusey  with 
a  view  to  persuading  him  and  his  friends  to  help  on  the 
Memorial,  and  intimated  that  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury felt  the  same  anxiety  for  their  help.  Pusey  proposed 
to  the  Bishop  "  to  change  the  Memorial  from  a  com- 
memoration of  the  Reformers  into  a  thanksgiving  for  the 
blessings  of  the  Reformation,"  and  he  pressed  the  Bishop 
to  endeavour  to  get  the  Archbishop  to  recommend  this 
alteration.  But  it  was  all  in  vain ;  Tractarian  efforts  to 
spoil  the  Memorial  by  depriving  it  of  its  leading  charac- 
teristic were  happily  defeated.  The  beautiful  monument 
to  Cranmer,  Ridley,  and  Latimer,  still  to  be  seen  near 
St.  Mary  Magdalene  Church,  Oxford,  was  unveiled  in  1841. 
"  It  was,"  says  Mr.  G.  V.  Cox,  in  his  Recollections  ofOxfordy  "  a 
noble  proof  (though  a  somewhat  tardy  one),  that  Oxford 
still  cherished  the  memory  of  those  great  martyrs  to  the 
Reformation.  The  subscription  was  a  large  one  (^5000), 
and  was  raised  with  wonderful  rapidity  ;  out  of  it,  besides 
the  Martyrs'  Memorial,  was  also  built  an  additional  aisle 
on  the  north  side  of  Magdalen  Parish  Church,  to  be  called 
"The  Martyrs'  Aisle."  It  had  been  found  impracticable 
to  get  a  site  in  Broad  Street,  the  actual  scene  of  the  Mar- 

^  Oxford  Protestant  Magazine,  vol.  for  1848,  p.  597. 


INSCRIPTION    ON    THE    MARTYRS'    MEMORIAL         II3 

tyrdom."  ^  On  the  north  side  of  the  Memorial  is  the 
inscription,  which  well  merits  a  place  in  these  pages.  It 
is  as  follows  : — 

"To  the  Glory  of  God,  and  in  grateful  commemoration  of  His 
servants,  Thomas  Cranmer,  Nicholas  Ridley,  Hugh  Latimer,  Prelates 
of  the  Church  of  England,  who,  near  this  spot,  yielded  their  bodies 
to  be  burned ;  bearing  witness  to  the  sacred  truths  which  they  had 
affirmed  and  maintained  against  the  errors  of  the  Church  of  Rome ; 
and  rejoicing  that  to  them  it  was  given  not  only  to  believe  on  Christ, 
but  also  to  suffer  for  His  sake.  This  Monument  was  erected  by 
public  subscription  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  God,  1841." 

^  Recollections  of  Oxford.     By  G.  V.  Cox,  M.A.,  2nd  edition,  p.  305. 


CHAPTER   V 

Newman  in  1839 — Influenced  by  an  article  in  the  Dubliti  Review — 
Remarkable  acknowledgments — Corporate  Reunion  with  Rome — 
Preparing  the  way  for  Rome — The  Pastor  of  Antwerp — Breakfasts 
with  Newman  and  his  friends — Startling  and  treasonable  advice 
given  him — Pusey  writes  on  Tendencies  to  Romanism — He  pleads 
for  peace  in  the  Church — Dr.  M'Crie  on  the  cry  for  peace — Prayers 
for  the  Dead — Breeks  v.  Woolfrey — West  v.  Shuttleworth — Egerton 
V.  All  of  Rode — Moresby  Faculty  Case — Dr.  Pusey  begins  to  hear 
Confessions  in  1838 — In  1846  he  goes  to  Confession  for  the  first 
time — His  Protestant  notes  in  the  Works  of  TertuUian — Wiseman 
hopes  the  Tractarians  will  "succeed  in  their  work" — He  realises  the 
Roman  tendency  of  their  teaching — Extracts  from  the  Tracts  for 
the  Times — Margaret  Chapel  as  a  centre  of  Tractarianism — Mr. 
Serjeant  Bellasis — Oakeley  claims  the  right  to  "  hold  all  Roman 
doctrine" — He  is  prosecuted  by  the  Bishop  of  London— His  licence 
revoked — Pusey  defends  Oakeley — Says  the  judgment  against  him 
has  no  moral  force — Pusey  says  he  believes  in  Purgatory  and  Invo- 
cation of  Saints — Thinks  England  and  Rome  "  not  irreconcilably  at 
variance" — Oakeley  secedes  to  Rome. 

The  year  1839  was  a  memorable  one  in  the  life  of 
Newman.  It  was  during  the  summer  of  that  year  that 
(as  he  informed  the  Rev.  J.  B.  Mozley  four  years  later)  : 
"  It  came  strongly  upon  me,  from  first  reading  the  Mono- 
physite  controversy,  and  then  turning  to  the  Donatist,  that 
we  were  external  to  the  Catholic  Church.  I  have  never 
got  over  this."  ^  Writing  to  Pusey,  on  August  28,  1844, 
he  declared  : — "  I  am  one  who,  even  five  years  ago  \i.e. 
1839],  had  a  strong  conviction,  from  reading  the  history 
of  the  early  ages,  that  we  are  not  part  of  the  Church."  ^ 
Writing  again  to  Pusey,  on  March  14,  1845,  Newman 
tells  him  : — "  My  doubts  [of  the  Catholicity  of  the  Church 
of  England]  were  occasioned  by  studying  the  Monophysite 
controversy — which,  when  mastered,  threw  light  upon  all 
those  which  preceded  it,  not  the  least  on  the  Arian.     I 

^  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  430.  ^  Life  of  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  406. 

114 


NEWMAN'S    REMARKABLE    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS         II5 

saw  as  clear  as  day  (though  I  was  well  aware  clear  im- 
pressions need  not  at  once  be  truths)  that  our  Church 
was  in  the  position  towards  Rome  of  the  heretical  and 
schismatical  bodies  towards  the  Primitive  Church.  This 
was  in  the  early  summer  of  1839  ;  in  the  autumn,  Dr. 
Wiseman's  article  on  the  Donatists  completed  my  unsettle- 
ment.  Since  that  time  I  have  tried,  first  by  one  means, 
then  by  another,  to  overcome  my  own  convictions."  ^ 
Newman's  first  impressions  on  reading  Wiseman's  article 
(which  appeared  in  the  Dublin  Review,  August  1839)  were 
conveyed  by  him  to  his  friend,  Mr.  F.  Rogers,  afterwards 
Lord  Blachford  : — "  Since  I  wrote  to  you,"  he  tells  him, 
"  I  have  had  the  first  real  hit  from  Romanism  which 
has  happened  to  me.  R.  W.,  who  has  been  passing 
through,  directed  my  attention  to  Dr.  Wiseman's  article 
in  the  new  Dublin.  I  must  confess  it  has  given  me  a 
stomach-ache."  ^ 

Now,  to  any  ordinary  mind  it  must  seem  strange  that 
Newman,  who  confesses  that  he  felt  "strongly,"  in  1839, 
that  the  Church  of  England  was  ^^  external  to  the  Catholic 
Church,"  and  who,  at  that  time,  had  ''  clear  impressions  " 
that  the  position  of  the  Church  of  England  towards  the 
Catholic  Church  was  identical  with  that  of  the  ancient 
"  heretical  and  schismatical  bodies,"  could  possibly,  with  a 
comfortable  conscience,  remain  "  external  to  the  Catholic 
Church  "  for  another  six  years  !  But  Newman's  mind 
being  of  a  naturally  Jesuitical  kind,  he  seems  to  have 
set  himself  right  with  himself,  by  the  following  ingenious 
illustration  (written  within  a  fortnight  from  the  time  that 
he  got  the  "stomach-ache")  to  his  friend  Mr.  F.  Rogers, 
and  evidently  intended  to  elicit  his  opinion  of  it : — 

"  Well,  then,"  wrote  Newman,  *'  once  more ;  as  those  who  sin 
after  Baptism  cannot  at  once  return  to  their  full  privileges,  yet  are 
not  without  hope,  so  a  Church  which  has  broken  away  from  the 
centre  of  unity  is  not  at  liberty  at  once  to  return,  yet  is  not  nothing. 
May  she  not  put  herself  into  a  state  of  penance?  Are  not  her 
children  best  fulfilling  their  duty  to  her — not  by  leaving  her,  but  by 


^  Life  of  Ftisey,  vol.  ii.  p.  450.  ^  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  286. 


Il6  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

promoting  her  return,  and  not  thinking  that  they  have  a  right  to 
rush  into  such  higher  state  as  communion  with  the  centre  of  unity 
might  give  them.  If  the  Church  Catholic,  indeed,  has  actually 
commanded  their  return  to  her  at  once,  that  is  another  matter ;  but 
this  she  cannot  have  done  without  pronouncing  their  present  Church 
good  for  nothing,  which  I  do  not  suppose  Rome  has  done  of  us. 
In  all  this,  which  I  did  not  mean  to  have  inflicted  on  you,  I  assume, 
on  the  one  hand,  that  Rome  is  right ;  on  the  other,  that  we  are  not 
bound  by  uncatholic  subscriptions."  ^ 

There  is  all  the  wisdom  of  the  serpent  in  this  scheme, 
though  none  of  the  innocence  of  the  dove ;  and  after 
reading  Newman's  statements  in  subsequent  years,  I  have 
no  doubt  that  it  served  to  quieten,  if  not  altogether  to 
silence,  his  own  conscience  for  the  next  six  years.  The 
scheme  was  a  subtle  one,  known  in  later  years  by  the 
designation,  "  Corporate  Reunion  with  Rome,"  as  distinct 
from  individual  secession.  Members  of  the  Church  of 
England  were  to  "fulfil  their  duty  to  her,  not  by  leaving 
her,  but  by  promoting  her  return "  to  "  the  centre  of 
unity  " — the  Church  of  Rome.  From  this  year  the  idea 
of  Corporate  Reunion  with  Rome  seems  to  have  been  ever 
present  to  Newman,  until  he  seceded  to  her  in  1845.  Of 
the  year  1840  he  writes: — "I  wished  for  union  between 
the  Anglican  Church  and  Rome,  if,  and  when  it  was 
possible  ;  and  I  did  what  I  could  to  gain  weekly  prayers 
for  that  object."  ^  In  October  of  this  year  he  frankly 
admitted  to  a  friend  : — *'  I  fear  I  must  allov^^  that,  whether 
I  will  or  no,  I  am  disposing  them  [those  he  influenced 
by  his  teaching]  towards  Rome.  First,  because  Rome 
is  the  only  representative  of  the  Primitive  Church  besides 
ourselves ;  in  proportion  then  as  they  are  loosened  from 
the  one,  they  will  go  to  the  other.  Next,  because  many 
doctrines  which  I  have  held  have  far  greater ,  or  their  only  scope, 
in  the  Roman  systetnT  ^  And,  therefore,  he  began  to  think 
of  giving  up  St.  Mary's  Vicarage,  Oxford,  which  he  then 
held,  and  migrating  to  the  Vicarage  of  Littlemore,  where 
he  might  continue  to  teach,   by  pen  and  mouth,   those 

^  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  288. 

-  Newman's  Apologia  Pro  Vita  Sua,  p.  222.  *  /did.  p.  236. 


NEWMAN    AND    THE    PROTESTANT    PASTOR  II7 

doctrines  which,  even  at  that  time,  he  beHeved  had  "  a  far 
greater,  or  their  only  scope,  in  the  Roman  system."  Was 
this  honest  ?  After  making  such  an  important  discovery, 
ought  he  not  at  once  to  have  given  up  all  Ministerial  duty 
in  the  Church  of  England,  and  seceded  to  a  Church  where 
his  peculiar  doctrines  have  their  only  honest  "  scope "  ? 
But,  if  he  had  at  that  time  done  this,  what  would  have 
become  of  his  schemes  for  Corporate  Reunion  with  Rome  ? 
To  a  Roman  Catholic  layman  Newman  wrote,  on  Septem- 
ber 12,  1 841 : — "We  are  keeping  people  from  you  [Church 
of  Rome],  by  supplying  their  wants  in  our  own  Church. 
We  are  keeping  persons  from  you  :  do  you  wish  us  to 
keep  them  from  you  for  a  time  or  for  ever  ?  It  rests  with 
you  to  determine.  I  do  not  fear  that  you  will  succeed 
among  us  ;  you  will  not  supplant  our  Church  in  the 
affections  of  the  English  nation ;  only  through  the 
English  Church  can  you  act  upon  the  English 
NATION.  I  wish,  of  course,  our  Church  should  be  con- 
solidated, with  and  through  and  in  your  communion,  for  its 
sake,  and  your  sake,  and  for  the  sake  of  unity."  ^ 

Only  six  days  before  Newman  wrote  the  letter  from 
which  my  last  extract  is  given.  Baron  Bunsen  described 
to  a  friend  an  incident  in  which  Newman  had  recently 
taken  part,  and  in  which  the  Romish  sympathies  of 
Newman  and  his  friends  came  out  in  a  somewhat  start- 
ling manner  : — 

"The  other  day,"  wrote  Baron  Bunsen,  on  Sept.  6,  1841, 
"Sporlein,  the  good  Pastor  of  Antwerp,  my  fellow-traveller,  arrived 
on  his  pilgrimage  to  seek  comfort  in  the  Church  and  faith  of  this 
country.  At  Oxford  he  went  to  Newman,  who  invited  him  to 
breakfast  for  a  conference  on  religious  opinions.  Sporlein  ^  stated 
his  difficulties,  as  resulting  from  the  consistorial  government  being 
in  the  hands  of  unbelievers,  which  in  the  Evangelical  Society  which 
he  had  been  tempted  to  join,  the  leading  members  protested  against 
every  idea  of  Church  membership.  The  breakfast  party  consisted 
of  fifteen  young  men,  whom  Newman  invited  to  an  expression  of 
opinion  and  advice ;  and  the  award  {uncontradicted)  was  that  '  Pastor 

^  Newman's  Apologia  Pro  Vita  Sua,  pp.  312,  313. 

^  Sporlein  had  come  over  to  England  with  a  view  to  joining  the  Ministry  of 
the  Church  of  England. 


Il8  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Sporlein,  as  a  Continental  Christian,  was  subject  to  the  authority  of 
the  Bishop  of  Antwerp.^  He  objected  that  by  that  Bishop  he  would 
be  excommunicated  as  a  heretic.  'Of  course;  but  you  will  conform 
to  his  decision  ? '  '  How  can  I  do  that,'  exclaimed  Sporlein,  '  without 
abjuring  my  faith  ? '  *  But  your  faith  is  heresy.^  '  How  ?  Do  you 
mean  that  I  am  to  enibrace  the  errors  of  Mofne,  and  abjure  the  faith 
of  the  Gospel  ? '  '  There  is  no  faith  but  that  of  the  Church.'  '  But 
my  faith  is  in  Christ  crucified.'  '  You  are  mistaken ;  you  are  not 
saved  by  Christ,  but  in  the  Church.' 

"  Sporlein  was  thunderstruck.  He  looked  around,  asked  again, 
obtained  but  the  same  reply,  whereupon  he  burst  out  again  with  the 
declaration  that  'he  believed  in  Christ  crucified,  by  whose  merits 
alone  he  could  be  saved,  and  that  he  would  not  join  the  Church  of 
Rome,  abhorring  her  for  intruding  into  the  place  of  Christ.'  One 
after  the  other  dropped  away,  and  Newman,  remaining  with  him 
alone,  attempted  an  explanation  which,  however,  did  not  alter  the 
case.  I  repeated  this  lamentable  story  as  Sporlein  had  told  it  to 
Hare  and  myself,  and  Pusey  said  it  was  like  telling  a  man  com- 
plaining of  toothache  that  the  infallible  remedy  would  be  cutting  off 
his  head."^ 

No  wonder  that  Baron  Bunsen  exclaimed,  after  writing 
the  above  pitiful  story,  "  Oh,  this  is  heartrending  ! "  It 
was  so  indeed.  Here  was  a  Protestant  Pastor,  anxious 
to  join  the  Ministry  of  the  Church  of  England,  intro- 
duced to  a  party  of  sixteen  members  of  that  Church 
(probably  all  clergymen),  including  Newman,  and  they, 
instead  of  smoothing  his  path,  unanimously  tell  him  to 
go  off  to  the  Church  of  Rome  at  once,  and  submit  to 
the  Popish  Bishop  of  Antwerp  !  Such  advice  was  simply 
disgraceful  to  those  who  gave  it.  It  was  the  advice  of 
disloyal  traitors  within  the  camp.  No  wonder,  too,  that 
Sporlein  "was  thunderstruck."  The  high  personal 
character  of  Baron  Bunsen,  and  his  intellectual  powers, 
prevent  us  supposing  for  one  moment  that  he  was  mis- 
taken. I  am  glad,  for  Pusey's  sake,  that  he  did  not  see 
the  wisdom  of  the  advice  of  these  thirteen  treacherous 
Tractarians. 

We    now    return    to    Dr.    Pusey,    who    had    greatly 

^  Of  course,  the  Roman  Catholic  Bishop  of  Antwerp. 

^  Ma7ioir  of  Baron  Bunsen,  vol.  i.  pp.  613,  614,  ist  edition. 


BISHOP    BAGOT    AND    DR.    PUSEY  1 19 

troubled  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  by  finally  refusing  to 
have  anything  to  do  with  the  proposed  Martyrs'  Memo- 
rial. His  lordship  evidently  saw  the  harm  that  would 
be  done  to  the  cause  of  the  Tractarians  through  their 
conduct  in  holding  aloof,  and  that  its  tendency  would  be 
to  confirm  the  public  in  their  belief  that  the  whole  party 
hated  both  the  Reformers  and  the  Reformation  with  all 
their  hearts.  So  he  wrote,  on  January  19,  1839,  an 
earnest  appeal  on  the  subject : — 

"Let  me  then,"  wrote  Dr.  Bagot,  "entreat  you,  then,  by  the  love 
which  (in  spite  of  the  assertions  of  your  opposers  in  these  days  of 
misrepresentation)  I  am  convinced  you  feel  for  our  Reformed 
Church,  if  you  cannot  approve  the  Memorial,  to  make  some  declara- 
tion at  a  fit  time,  and  in  what  you  may  deem  the  fittest  mode — by 
letter  or  by  publication  of  some  sort — such  as  shall  stop  the  accusa- 
tions of  your  being  in  any  degree  hostile  to  the  Reformation,  enable 
your  friends  to  defend  you  from  such  charges,  and  put  to  silence 
the  Romanists  who  wrongly  but  boldly  claim  you  as  countenancing 
them."  1 

This  request  led  Pusey  to  write,  shortly  afterwards,  his 
Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  on  the  Tendencies  to  Romanism 
Imputed  to  Doctrines  Held  of  Old,  as  Now,  in  the  English 
Church,  Within  a  few  months  it  ran  into  its  fourth 
edition,  to  which  a  special  preface  on  "The  Doctrine 
of  Justification "  was  attached,  thus  making  in  all  no  less 
than  322  pages,  including  twenty  pages  of  extracts  from 
the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  the  Lyra  Apostolica,  and  other 
publications  of  the  Tractarians,  and  all  with  a  view  to 
"showing  that  to  oppose  Ultra-Protestantism  is  not  to 
favour  Popery."  Here  I  may  remark  that  what  the  Trac- 
tarians, and  their  successors  the  Ritualists  generally,  mean 
by  "  Ultra- Protestantism"  is  Protestantism  of  the  type  mani- 
fested by  such  men  as  Cranmer,  Ridley,  Latimer,  and  Jewel ; 
that  is.  Protestantism  without  compromise  ;  but  with 
abundance  of  courage  to  attack  unscriptural  doctrines. 
It  must  be  here  admitted  that  in  theory  Dr.  Pusey  always 
put  himself  forward  as  a  friend  of  the  Reformation,  though 

^  Life  of  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  72. 


I20  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

he  refused  to  be  called  a  disciple  of  those  Reformers  who^ 
under  God,  were  the  means  of  bringing  about  the  Re- 
formation. And  he  certainly  was,  down  to  the  day  of  his 
death,  the  warmest  friend  of  Corporate  Reunion  with 
Rome  to  be  found  in  the  Church  of  England.  Through- 
out his  Letter  there  appears  that  mourning  over  our  un- 
happy divisions,  and  that  cry  for  peace  in  the  Church, 
which  comes  with  such  a  bad  grace  from  the  men  who, 
alone,  are  responsible  for  the  existence  of  our  divisions, 
and  are  the  real  cause  of  banishing  peace  from  the  Church. 
There  is  nothing  the  Ritualists  more  desire  than  to  be  left 
alone  in  peace  to  do  their  work,  and  for  this  purpose  they 
are  ever  pleading  for  a  liberal  and  tolerant  spirit  in  their 
opponents.  What  Dr.  M'Crie  says  of  the  enemies  of  the 
Church  of  Scotland  at  the  commencement  of  the  seven- 
teenth century,  may  be  applied  to  these  modern  disturbers 
of  the  peace  of  the  Church  of  England.  "  We  can  con- 
ceive nothing,"  he  writes,  "more  impertinent  and  dis- 
gusting than  the  cant  of  liberality,  when  assumed  by  men 
who,  in  the  act  of  robbing  the  Church  of  her  dearest 
privileges,  affect  to  mourn  over  the  contentions  which  are 
the  fruits  of  their  own  selfish  policy."  ^ 

In  his  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  Pusey  states  that : — 
"  The  charges  against  us  are  heavy  ;  disaffection  to  our 
own  Church,  unfaithfulness  to  her  teaching,  a  desire  to 
bring  in  new  doctrines,  and  to  conform  our  Church  more 
to  the  Church  of  Rome,  to  bring  back  either  entire  or 
'  modified  Popery. '  "  ^  He  expresses  the  regret  of  himself 
and  his  friends  that  the  Church  of  England  had  not  "re- 
tained more  of  what  was  ancient  in  the  Breviary  and  the 
Missal,  without  approximating  in  any  way  to  the  corrup- 
tions of  modern  Rome "  ;  ^  and  he  expresses  the  opinion 
that  "the  revisers  of  our  Liturgy  did  unadvisedly  in 
yielding  some  more  explicit  statements  of  doctrine  to  the 
suggestions  of  foreign  Reformers,  whose  tone  of  mind  was 
different   from  that    of   our   Church."  *       Incidentally   he 

^  Sketches  of  Scottish  Church  History.     By  the  Rev.  Thomas  M'Crie,  p.  156, 
edition  1841. 

^  Pusey's  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  4th  edition,  p.  10.     1840, 
^  Ibid.  p.  15.  •*  Ibid.  p.  20, 


PUSEY    AND    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT  121 

mentions  that : — "  We  feel  no  desire  for  the  meeting  of 
Convocation  ;  we  are  not  even  earnest  in  behalf  of  a 
repeal  of  the  Statute  of  Praemunire,  though  it  would  cer- 
tainly be  becoming  and  just."  ^  He  claims  that  the  position 
of  the  Tractarians  is  that  of  the  "  via  media,"  "  in  contrast 
with  Romanism  on  the  one  hand,  and  Ultra-Protestantism 
on  the  other  "  ;  ^  and  then  he  proceeds  to  state  what  he 
and  his  friends  did  hold.  His  first  point  is  sufficiently 
startling  to  a  Protestant  Churchman.  After  stating  that 
as  to  "  the  first  five  Articles  "  of  the  Church  of  England 
"  the  Church  of  Rome  is  allowed  to  have  transmitted 
faithfully  the  doctrine  of  the  Primitive  Church,"  Pusey 
proceeds  : — "  Would,  my  Lord,  that  there  were  no  signs  of 
unsoundness  on  any  other  side  !  But  whereas  a  tradi- 
tionary faith  would  be  safe  with  regard  to  these  essential 
Articles,  in  that  it  would  depart  neither  to  the  right  nor  to 
the  left  from  that  which  the  Universal  Church  had  attested  to 
be  the  Apostolic  and  Scriptural  Creed,  the  greater,  because 
unsuspected,  danger  will  beset  those  who  profess  to  draw 
their  faith,  unaided,  from  Holy  Scripture."  ^  This,  of 
course,  was  equivalent  to  saying  that  those  Protestants  who 
draw  their  faith  direct  from  the  Scriptures  are  in  "  greater  " 
danger  than  those  who,  like  the  Tractarians,  draw  it 
through  the  muddy  channels  of  the  Church's  traditions. 
We  must  ever  claim  our  right  to  draw  our  faith  direct 
from  the  fountain  head,  the  Written  Word  of  God  ;  but  it 
is  not  true  to  assume  that  any  Protestant  does  so  "un- 
aided." There  is  the  aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God 
Himself,  given  in  answer  to  prayer,  and  also  the  im- 
portant aid  obtained  by  comparing  Scripture  with  Scrip- 
ture. Pusey  warns  his  readers  against  "  the  danger  of  an 
over  anxiety  to  recede  from  Rome,"  *  an  offence  of  which, 
it  must  be  admitted,  neither  Dr.  Pusey  nor  his  followers 
have  ever  been  guilty.  He  declares  that  "  it  is  probable 
that  our  Church  means  that  things  may  be  required  to  be 
believed  (provided  it  be  not  upon  peril  of  salvation)  which 
are    not    proved    by    Holy    Scripture  ;     but    certain    that, 

^  Pusey's  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  p.  21. 

2  Ibid.  p.  22.  ■''  Ibid.  pp.  22,  23.  *  Ibid.  p.  25. 


122  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

according  to  her,  things  not  in  Holy  Scripture  may  be 
subjects  of  belief"^  —  thus  opening  a  door  which  may 
lead  the  unwary  to  a  belief  in  many  of  the  worst  errors 
of  Popery,  and  all  this  in  a  subtle  and  Jesuitical  explana- 
tion of  Article  VI.  Pusey  was  terribly  afraid  of  Private 
Judgment,  and  therefore  he  cautions  his  readers  on  this 
point  by  assuring  them  that  the  "  children  "  of  the  Church 
"are  not  the  arbiters,  whether  she  pronounce  rightly  or 
no "  ^  in  expounding  Holy  Scripture.  Apparently  they 
are  expected  to  shut  their  eyes  and  open  their  mouths  and 
take  without  enquiry  what  "  the  Church  " — which,  to  the 
individual,  practically  means  his  own  clergyman  —  may 
choose  to  give  him.  "  Prove  all  things  "  seems  to  be  no 
part  of  the  Puseyite  creed  in  the  Scriptural  sense.  Ap- 
parently they  would  have  been  horrified  at  the  conduct  of 
the  Bereans  of  old  who,  in  the  exercise  of  their  private 
judgment,  would  not  believe  even  what  St.  Paul  taught, 
until  they  proved  his  doctrine  to  be  true  out  of  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures :  "  These  were  more  noble  than 
those  in  Thessalonica,  in  that  they  received  the  Word 
with  all  readiness  of  mind,  and  searched  the  Scriptures 
daily,  whether  those  things  were  so"  (Acts  xvii.  ii).  At 
page  44  Pusey  boldly  declares  that  <<  no  real  CEcumenical 
Council  ever  did  "  err,  and  that  notwithstanding  the  clear 
statement  of  Article  XXI.  to  the  contrary,  wherein  we 
read  that  "  General  Councils  .  .  .  may  err,  and  sometimes 
have  erred,  even  in  things  pertaining  unto  God."  He 
further  quotes,  with  approval,  a  sermon  of  Newman  in 
favour  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Infallibility  of  the  whole 
Catholic  Church.  "  Both  we  and  Romanists,"  said 
Newman,  ''  hold  that  the  Church  Catholic  is  unerring  in 
its  declarations  of  faith  for  saving  doctrine  ;  but  we  differ 
from  each  other  as  to  what  is  the  faith,  and  what  is  the 
Church  Catholic  "  ^ ;  and  : — "  We  are  at  peace  with  Rome 
as  regards  the  essentials  of  faith."  *  Pusey  slanders 
decided  Protestants  when  he  most  untruly  declares  that 


1  Pusey's  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  p. 
8  Ibid.  p.  50.  *  Ibid.  p.  51. 


28.  2  /3,-^_  p_  20. 


PUSEY    ON    JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH  123 

"Ultra-Protestants"  "'prefer  what  is  modern  to  what  is 
ancient,"  and  "  disparage  Christian  antiquity  "  ^ ;  since,  as 
is  well  known,  instead  of  disparaging  it,  they  are  always 
appealing  to  Apostolic  antiquity,  as  recorded  in  the  Bible, 
and,  as  has  been  well  said,  "  prefer  the  Grandfathers  [the 
Apostles]  to  the  Fathers."  Pusey  then  makes  an  attack 
on  the  Protestant  doctrine  of  Justification  by  Faith  only, 
assuring  his  readers  that  Lutherans,  Wesleyans,  "and  a 
section  of  our  own  Church "  —  by  which  he  meant 
Evangelical  Churchmen — "  have  been  taught  that  Justi- 
fication is  not  the  gift  of  God  through  His  Sacraments,  but 
the  result  of  a  certain  frame  of  mind,  of  a  going  forth  of 
themselves,  and  resting  themselves  upon  their  Saviour;  this  is 
the  act  whereby  they  think  themselves  to  have  been  justified."  ^ 
This  doctrine  Pusey  hated  with  all  his  heart,  and  thought 
it  a  greater  evil  than  the  Roman  Catholic  system  of 
Justification.  That  system.  Tie  affirmed,  had  its  "corrup- 
tions "  ;  but  "  it  bore  witness  to  the  holiness  of  God."  ^ 
The  Evangelical  system,  however,  is,  he  affirms,  "  altogether 
a  spurious  system,  misapplying  the  promises  of  the  Gospel, 
usurping  the  privileges  of  Baptism,  which  it  has  not  to 
bestow."  ■* 

In  this  Letter  Pusey  professes  his  faith  in  the  doctrine 
of  the  Real  Presence,  while  repudiating  the  doctrine  of 
Transubstantiation.  He  says  that  he  believes  in  "  the 
spiritual  unseen  Presence  of  that  Blessed  Body  and  Blood, 
conveyed  to  us  through  the  unchanged  though  consecrated  ele- 
ments, unchanged  in  material  substance,  changed  in  their 
use,  their  efficacy,  their  dignity,  mystically  and  spiritually. 
We  see  not  why  we  need  avoid  language  used  by  the 
Fathers  .  .  .  that  '  the  bread  and  wine  is  made  the 
Body  and  Blood  of  Christ.' "  ^  But  on  this  subject,  evil 
as  Pusey  thinks  the  doctrine  of  Rome,  he  considers  the 
doctrine  of  Calvin  and  Zwingle  a  greater  evil : — "  For,"  he 
says,  "  deeply  as  Rome  has  erred,  and  much  error  as  she 
has  thereby  given  occasion  to  in  others,  we  fear  that  others 
have  erred  still  more  deeply.     Not  Zwingli  alone,  but  Calvin, 

^  Pusey's  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  p.  58.  "^  Ibid.  p.  72. 

8  Ibid.  p.  87.  *  Ibid.  p.  88.  »  Ibid.  p.  131. 


124  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

have,  in  their  way,  so  explainedthe  mode  of  Christ's  presence, 
as  virtually  to  explain  it  away."  ^  He  asserts  that  Rome 
is  "  presumptuous "  in  teaching  that  "  Christ  is  wholly 
contained  under  each  species " ;  and  he  rejects  Rome's 
doctrine  that  ''  in  the  holy  Sacrament  of  the  Eucharist, 
Christ,  the  Only  Begotten  Son  of  God,  is  to  be  adored 
with  the  outw^ard  adoration  of  Divine  worship."^  As  to 
the  Sacrament,  as  a  whole,  he  writes  : — "  Rome,  in  this 
respect,  has  the  truth,  though  mingled  with  error,  and 
clouded  and  injured  by  it ;  the  Zwingli-Calvinist  school 
have  forfeited  it."  ^  It  is  evident  that  much  as  Dr.  Pusey 
might  dislike  certain  portions  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
religion,  he  would — even  as  far  back  as  1840 — greatly 
prefer  being  a  Romanist  to  being  an  "  Ultra-Protestant." 
As  to  Prayers  for  the  Dead,  he  considers  it  "  a  solemn 
privilege  to  the  mourner  ;  but  not,  after  that  (in  con- 
sequence of  abuses  connected  with  it  in  the  Romish 
system)  it  had  been  ivithdrawn  from  our  Church,  to 
be  rashly  and  indiscriminately  revived " ;  *  and  yet  al- 
though the  Church,  "for  the  safety  of  her  children,  has 
relinquished  the  practice,  her  doctrine  is  in  accordance 
with  it."  ^ 

Now  it  must  be  said  of  this  Letter  of  Dr.  Pusey  that  it 
exactly  proves  what  it  was  ostensibly  written  to  disprove, 
viz.,  that  he  and  his  party  were  labouring  to  bring  back 
into  the  Church  of  England  a  certain  amount  of  Popery, 
though  not,  of  course,  all  of  it.  Pusey's  views,  as  herein 
expressed,  of  private  judgment  in  the  interpretation  of 
Scripture,  of  Tradition,  of  the  infallibility  of  the  Church 
and  of  General  Councils,  of  Justification  by  faith  only, 
of  Baptismal  Regeneration,  the  Real  Presence,  and  Prayers 
for  the  Dead,  were,  and  are,  in  the  estimation  of  ninety- 
nine  out  of  every  hundred  Protestant  Churchmen,  distinctly 
Romish,  and  tend  to  Romanism  by  creating  a  thirst  for 
that  sacerdotal  form  of  religion  which  the  Church  of 
Rome  alone  can  fully  satisfy.  The  set  of  quotations  from 
Tractarian  writings,  published  at  the  end  of  Pusey's  pamph- 

^  Pusey's  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  p.  132,  ^  Ipid.  p.  134. 

*  Ibid.  p.  144,  *  Ibid.  p.  187.  '^  Ibid.  p.  189. 


PRAYERS    FOR    THE    DEAD  I25 

let,  only  proved — what  at  that  time  nobody  denied — that 
there  were  certain  portions  of  the  Roman  system  which 
they  rejected.  Protestant  Churchmen  could  not  see  that 
Tractarians  were  justified  in  introducing  many  Roman 
Catholic  doctrines,  merely  on  the  ground  that  they  pro- 
tested against  other  Roman  doctrines. 

In  this  Letter  Pusey  referred  to  a  judgment  of  Sir 
Herbert  Jenner  Fust,  in  the  case  of  Brceks  v.  Woolfrey, 
delivered  in  1839,  in  the  Court  of  Arches.  The  question 
before  the  Court  was  not  whether  Prayers  for  the  Dead 
could  be  lawfully  and  publicly  used  in  a  parish  church, 
but  whether  it  were  lawful  to  inscribe  on  a  tombstone  in  a 
parish  churchyard  the  following  words  : — ''  Pray  for  the 
soul  of  J.  Woolfrey ; "  and  "It  is  a  holy  and  wholesome 
thought  to  pray  for  the  dead. — 2  Mac.  xii.  46."  The 
tombstone  containing  these  words  had  actually  been  set 
up  in  Carisbrooke  Churchyard,  Isle  of  Wight,  by  a  Roman 
Catholic  lady,  Mrs.  Woolfrey,  widow  of  the  person  there 
buried.  The  Rev.  J.  Breeks,  vicar  of  Carisbrooke,  entered 
an  action  against  Mrs.  Woolfrey,  praying  the  Court  of 
Arches  to  compel  her  to  remove  the  stone.  The  judge 
held  that  if  "  prayers  for  the  dead  necessarily  constitute  a 
part  of  the  doctrine  of  Purgatory,  as  held  by  the  Romish 
Church,"  then  "  the  Court  would  be  bound  to  monish  the 
party  to  remove  the  stone,  and  to  punish  her  with  ecclesi- 
astical censure  and  with  costs."  He  said  that  the  authori- 
ties cited  in  the  case  "  seem  to  go  no  further  than  this — 
to  show  that  the  Church  discouraged  prayers  for  the  dead,  but 
did  not  prohibit  them  ;  and  that  the  Twenty-second  Article 
is  not  violated  by  the  use  of  such  prayers."  Here  I  may 
remark  that  it  seems  incredible  that  the  Church  should 
"  discourage "  such  prayers  if  she  thought  them  good 
and  holy.  The  learned  judge  quoted  the  Homilies  of 
the  Church  of  England  on  prayers  for  the  dead,  and 
said  that  they  "  contained  the  same  disapproval  of  the 
practice,  but  no  positive  prohibition  of  it."  The  ques- 
tion may  here  be  asked,  how  can  that  Church  be  sup- 
posed to  tolerate  a  practice  of  which  she  has  expressed 
her  ''disapproval  "  ?    The  passages  in  the  Homilies  to  which 


126  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

the  judge  referred  are  found  in  the  Homily  Concerning  Prayer, 
Part  III.:— 

"  Now,"  says  the  Homily^  "  to  entreat  of  that  question,  whether 
we  ought  to  pray  for  them  that  are  departed  out  of  this  world,  or  no. 
Wherein,  if  we  cleave  only  unto  the  Word  of  God,  then  must  we 
needs  grant,  that  we  have  no  commandment  so  to  do.  For  the  Scrip- 
ture doth  acknowledge  but  two  places  after  this  life ;  the  one  proper 
to  the  elect  and  blessed  of  God,  the  other  to  the  reprobate  and 
damned  souls ;  as  may  be  well  gathered  by  the  parable  of  Lazarus 
and  the  rich  man.  .  .  .  These  words,  as  they  confound  the  opinion  of 
helping  the  dead  by  prayer,  so  do  they  clean  confute  and  take  away 
the  vain  error  of  Purgatory." 

"  Let  these  and  such  other  places  be  sufficient  to  take  away  the 
gross  error  of  Purgatory  out  of  our  heads ;  neither  let  us  drea?n  any 
more,  that  the  souls  of  the  dead  are  anything  at  all  holpen  by  our 
prayers  ;  but,  as  the  Scripture  teacheth  us,  let  us  think  that  the  soul 
of  man,  passing  out  of  the  body,  goeth  straightways  either  to  heaven, 
or  else  to  hell,  whereof  the  one  needeth  no  prayer,  the  other  is  without 
redemption." 

No  one  can  read  this  Homily  without  perceiving  that 
the  Church  of  England  is  most  anxious  that  her  children 
should  not  pray  for  the  dead.  The  judge  could  not  quote 
even  one  statement  of  the  Church  positively  in  favour  of 
such  prayers,  and  yet  he  concluded  his  judgment  in  these 
words  : — 

"I  am,  then,  of  opinion,  on  the  whole  of  the  case,  that  the 
offence  imputed  by  the  articles  has  not  been  sustained ;  that  no 
authority  or  canon  has  been  pointed  out  by  which  the  practice  of 
praying  for  the  dead  has  been  expressly  prohibited ;  and  I  am 
accordingly  of  opinion,  that,  if  the  articles  were  proved,  the  facts 
would  not  subject  the  party  to  ecclesiastical  censure,  as  far  as  regards 
the  illegality  of  the  inscription  on  the  tombstone."  ^ 

In  connection  with  this  tombstone  case  it  is  well  to 
remember  that  the  judgment  was  that  of  an  inferior  court, 
and  that  it  has  never  been  appealed  against.  Had  there 
then  been  an  appeal  to  the  Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy 

^  fiidgments  of  the  fiidicial  Committee  of  the  Privy  Council  in  Ecclesiastical 
Cases.  Edited  by  the  Hon.  George  C.  Brodrick,  and  the  Rev.  William  H. 
Freemantle,  pp.  354-360.     London  :  1865. 


PRAYERS    FOR    THE    DEAD  1 27 

Council,  I  have  no  doubt  that  the  judgment  of  Sir  Herbert 
Jenner  Fust  would  have  been  reversed.  As  it  is,  however, 
it  must  be  accepted  as  an  exposition  of  the  law  until  it  has 
been  reversed  by  the  Highest  Court  of  Appeal.  But  let 
it  not  be  forgotten  that  it  sanctions  only  a  request  for 
prayer  for  the  dead  when  inscribed  on  a  tombstone,  in  a 
churchyard,  and  not  on  a  tombstone  set  up  within  a  parish 
church.  It  does  not  sanction  public  prayers  for  the  dead 
in  a  parish  church :  these  are  manifestly  illegal,  since 
there  are  no  such  prayers  provided  in  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  and  the  clergy  are  pledged  to  use  only  in  public 
prayer  and  administration  of  the  Sacraments,  "  the  form 
in  the  said  Book  prescribed,  and  none  other,  except  so  far 
as  shall  be  ordered  by  lawful  authority."  ^  I  regret  the 
judgment,  but  it  is  well  to  point  out  that  its  powers  for 
evil  are  not  so  great  as  is  generally  supposed. 

On  this  subject  there  is  this  further  fact,  which  is  worthy 
of  consideration.  It  has  been  decided  that  prayers  for  the 
dead  are,  according  to  the  law  of  England,  superstitious  in 
their  character,  and  that  it  is  unlawful  to  leave  money  by 
will  to  priests,  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  their  prayers 
for  the  dead.  In  1835,  Sir  Charles  Pepys  gave  judgment 
in  the  case  of  West  v.  Shiittleworth.  In  this  case  the  will 
of  a  lady  was  considered,  by  which  she  left  ^10  each  to 
several  Roman  Catholic  priests,  for  the  benefit  of  their 
prayers  for  the  repose  of  her  soul,  and  that  of  her  deceased 
husband.     The  judge  said  : — 

"Taking  the  first  gift  to  priests  and  chapels  in  connection  with 
the  letter,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  sums  given  to  the  priests 
and  chapels  were  not  intended  for  the  benefit  of  the  priests  per- 
sonally, or  for  the  support  of  the  chapels  for  general  purposes,  but 
that  they  were  given,  as  expressed  in  the  \tXitr,  for  the  benefit  of  their 
prayers  for  the  repose  of  the  testatrix'' s  soul  and  that  of  her  deceased 
husband ;  and  the  question  is^  whether  such  legacies  can  be  sup- 
ported. It  is  truly  observed  by  Sir  William  Grant,  in  Cary  v.  Abbot 
(7  Ves.  490)  that  there  was  no  statute,  making  superstitious  uses 
void  generally,  and  that  the  statute  of  Edward  VI.  related  only  to 

^   'J  /le  Ecclesiastical  Law  of  the  Church  of  England.     By  Sir  Robert  Phillimore, 
p.  470,  edition  1873. 


128  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

superstitious  uses  of  a  particular  description  then  existing ;  and  it  is 
to  be  observed,  that  that  statute  does  not  declare  such  gifts  to  be 
unlawful,  but  avoids  certain  superstitious  gifts  previously  created. 
The  legacies  in  question,  therefore,  are  not  within  the  terms  of  the 
statute  of  Edward  VL,  but  that  statute  has  been  co?isidered  as  estab- 
lishing the  illegality  of  certain  gifts,  and  amongst  others  the  giving 
legacies  to  priests  to  pray  for  the  soul  of  the  do7ior  has,  in  many  cases 
collected  in  Duke  (p.  466)  been  decided  to  be  within  the  supersti- 
tious uses  intended  to  be  suppressed  by  that  statute.  I  am,  therefore, 
of  opinion  that  these  legacies  to  priests  and  chapels  are  void."  ^ 

The  question  of  the  lawfulness  of  Prayers  for  the 
Dead,  as  affected  by  the  case  of  Breeks  v.  Woolfrey^  was 
discussed  by  the  Solicitors'  Journal  of  January  16,  1875. 
Its  opinion  is  worth  citing  here.      It  said : — 

"  Canon  Liddon  stated  last  week,  in  a  letter  to  the  Times,  that 
prayers  for  the  dead  have  been  expressly  declared  legal  in  the 
Church  of  England.  We  presume  that  this  assertion  is  founded 
upon  Sir  H.  Jenner  Fust's  decision  in  Breeks  v.  Woolfrey;  but  that 
case  certainly  does  not  settle  the  law  upon  the  question.  It  was 
there  held  that  an  inscription  on  a  tombstone  in  Carisbrooke  church- 
yard begging  for  prayers  for  the  soul  of  the  deceased  was  lawful ; 
but,  as  Dr.  Liddon  would  find  if  the  experiment  were  tried,  it  is  one 
thing  to  allow  such  an  inscription  to  be  placed  on  a  monument  in  a 
churchyard,  and  quite  another  to  allow  prayers  for  the  dead  to  be 
used  during  the  services  of  the  Church.  To  the  latter  case  the  now 
firmly-established  and  well-known  principle  that  no  omission  from 
or  addition  to  the  prescribed  form  can  be  permitted  is  applicable 
(see  Westerton  v.  Liddell,  '  Moore's  Report ').  Moreover,  prayers 
for  the  dead  were,  it  must  be  remembered,  included  in  the  First 
Prayer  Book  of  Edward  VI. ,  and  are  excluded  from  the  present 
book,  and  would,  therefore,  now  be  illegal  upon  the  principle  on 
which  the  mixed  chalice,  which  was  ordered  by  the  former  Prayer 
Book,  and  not  ordered  in  the  latter,  has  already  been  pronounced 
illegal.  The  mistake  into  which  Dr.  Liddon  has  fallen  is  a  very 
natural  one  for  a  writer  unacquainted  with  the  legal  effect  of  the 
more  recent  decisions  in  our  Ecclesiastical  Courts.  But  any 
advocate  who  should  attempt  to  justify  prayers  for  the  dead  in  the 
Church  service  on  the  authority  of  Breeks  v.  Woolfrey  would  find 
he  had  undertaken  a  hopeless  task." 

^  The  Statutes  Relating  to  Ecclesiastical  Institutions.      By   Archibald  John 
Stephens,  vol.  ii.  p.  1508,  2nd  edition. 


PRAYERS    FOR    THE    DEAD  1 29 

The  case  of  Egerton  v.  All  of  Rode  has  an  important 
bearing  on  the  question  of  Prayers  for  the  Dead.  In  the 
Consistory  Court  of  Chester,  October  26,  1893,  before 
Chancellor  Espin,  a  faculty  was  applied  for  by  the  Rev. 
John  M.  Egerton,  Rector  of  Old  Rode,  to  erect  in  the 
Parish  Church  a  stained  glass  window,  with  the  following 
inscription  on  a  brass  plate  beneath  it : — "  De  caritate  tua 
ora  pro  anima  Henriettae  Franciscae  viduae  Georgii  Ha- 
merton  Crump  de  Chorlton  Hall  in  hoc  comitatu  mortua 
die  XXIII.  Augusti  A.D.  MDCCCXCii.  aetatis  suae  Lxxv. 
Et  pro  anima  Johannis  Hamerton  Crump  supradictorum 
filii  majoris  mortui  die  li.  Martii  A.D.  MDCCCLXXXVii. 
aetatis  suae  xxxiii."  In  giving  judgment  the  Chancellor 
said : — 

"When  the  proposed  inscription  was  brought  before  the  Court 
on  September  28  last,  I  referred  to  the  well-known  case  of  The 
Office  of  the  Judge  Fro?noted  by  Breeks  v.  Wooifrey,  and  did  so  on 
the  spur  of  the  moment,  not  having  seen  the  proposed  inscription 
until  just  before  the  Court  opened.  But  on  consideration  it  may  be 
doubted  whether  that  case  and  the  judgment  in  it  would  have 
warranted  the  Court  in  sanctioning  the  proposed  inscription  being 
placed  in  the  Church  of  All  Saints  at  Old  Rode.  The  case  of  Breeks 
V.  Woolfrey  is  a  leading  case,  and  the  judgment  in  it  is  a  considered 
judgment  delivered  by  Sir  Herbert  Jenner  Fust.  But  then  he  did 
not  directly  sanctiofi  the  inscription  before  him,  he  only  refused  to  order 
the  tombstone  which  bore  it  to  be  removed.  It  does  not  appear  that  he 
would  himself  have  authorised  the  inscription  if  he  had  been  asked  to 
do  so. 

"  Then  again  it  might  be  argued  that  the  proposed  Latin  inscrip- 
tion in  this  case,  the  translation  of  the  portion  of  which  material  to 
the  present  question  is  as  follows  : — '  Of  your  charity  pray  for  the 

soul  of  H F ,    widow   of  George    Hamerton   Crump,    of 

Chorlton  Hall,  in  this  county,  deceased  .  .  .  and  for  the  soul  of 
John  Hamerton  Crump,  .  .  .  son  of  the  above,  deceased  .  .  . '  goes 
somewhat  beyond  the  inscription  placed  on  the  tomb  of  Mr.  Woolfrey 
in  the  Churchyard  of  Carisbrooke.  So  far  as  material  the  latter  ran 
thus : — '  Spes  mea  Christus.  Pray  for  the  soul  of  J.  Woolfrey.  It 
is  a  holy  and  wholesome  thought  to  pray  for  the  dead. — 2  Macabees, 
xii..  46.' 

"  It  might  reasonably  be  said  perhaps  that  in  principle  the  pro- 
posed inscription  in  this  case  does  not  differ  from  the  inscription  in 

I 


130  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Breeks  v.  Woolfrey.  Still  the  one  submitted  to  this  Court  does 
seem  to  go  beyond  the  one  which  in  Breeks  v.  Woolfrey  the  Dean 
of  Arches  refused  to  displace,  and  this  Court  ought  in  my  opinion  to 
govern  itself  in  such  a  matter  somewhat  strictly  by  the  decisions  and 
precedents  furnished  by  the  Court  of  Arches.  .  •  . 

"  Prayers  for  the  Dead  are  unquestionably  associated  in  the 
popular  mind  with  the  later  exaggerations  referred  to  in  that  [22nd] 
Article,  and  it  may  be  added  that  a  bequest  made  for  such  prayers 
being  offered  up  would  be  void  by  the  common  law  of  the  realm  as 
superstitious.  And,  therefore,  though  in  private  such  prayers  may 
be  offered,  as  conformable  to  the  ways  of  the  Primitive  Church,  cer- 
tainly from  the  second  century  and  downwards  ;  and  however  deeply 
we  may  sympathise  with  sentiments  of  affectionate  respect  in  the 
bereaved,  fired  as  they  often  are  by  strong  realising  of  the  Com- 
munion of  Saints,  it  does  not  seem  to  belong  to  a  Court  of  first 
instance  to  do  what  the  formularies  of  the  Church  have  abstained 
from  doing ;  it  is  not  for  me  here  to  authorise  directly  the  setting  up 
in  a  place  of  public  worship  of  an  inscription  demanding  the  prayers 
of  the  worshippers  for  the  souls  of  certain  persons  who  have  departed 
this  life. 

"  In  the  result  I  must  decline  to  sanction  the  inscription  brought 
in  on  September  28  last,  being  placed  in  the  Church,  and  accord- 
ingly so  much  of  the  application  before  me  as  prays  that  a  faculty 
might  be  granted  for  placing  such  inscription  beneath  the  proposed 
window  must  be  rejected." ^ 

Another  faculty  case,  in  which  the  question  of  Prayers 
for  the  Dead  was  involved,  was  decided  just  as  I  was  about 
to  finish  the  writing  of  this  book.  At  a  sitting  of  the 
Consistory  Court  of  the  Diocese  of  Carlisle,  on  August  29, 
1900,  before  Chancellor  Prescott,  D.D.,  the  Vicar  and 
Churchwardens  of  Moresby  applied  for  leave  to  affix  on 
the  north  wall  of  the  said  church  an  ancient  memorial 
brass  taken  from  the  north  wall  of  the  chancel  of  the  old 
church,  where  it  had  been  placed  by  Thomas  Fletcher  in 
memory  of  his  father,  Sir  William  Fletcher,  who  died  in 
1703.  The  brass  tablet  was  said  to  have  been  lost  in 
1840,  but  was  recovered  by  the  late  Mr.  W.  Fletcher  from 
Distington  Museum.  It  bears  the  following  inscription  : 
"  Depositum  hie  jacet  in  spe  futurae  resurrectionis  corpus 
Gulielmi  Fletcher  ar  :    Nuper  Dom.  hujus  mannerii  qui 

*  The  Law  Reports.     Probate  Division,  1894,  pp.  16,  17,  22. 


PRAYERS    FOR   THE   DEAD  13I 

obiit  2do  die  Martii,  Anno  Domini,  1703,  aetatis  suae  58. 
Ciijus  animae  propitietur  Deus.  Requiem  aeternam  dona 
ei  Domine  et  lux  perpetua  luceat  ei.  Requiescat  in  pace. 
Amen.  Thomas  Fletcher,  ar.  filius  ejus  hoc  fieri  fecit." 
The  Chancellor,  in  delivering  judgment,  said  : — 

"  There  could  be  no  possible  objection  to  a  faculty  issuing  as  desired, 
all  the  regulations  having  been  observed,  and  it  being  the  wish  of  the 
parishioners  that  it  should  be  done.  The  memorial  tablet  which  it  was 
proposed  to  put  up  raised  a  very  important  question.  When  he  came 
to  look  at  it  he  found  that  this  tablet  was  on  what  was  called  the  old 
church,  and  had  been  apparently  lost  and  then  found  in  a  museum,  and 
it  was  now  proposed  to  put  it  into  the  new  church,  it  being  a  memorial 
tablet  to  one  of  the  Fletcher  family.  The  inscription  on  the  tablet 
was  in  Latin,  and  there  were  two  expressions  in  it  which  called  for 
some  remark.  One  of  them  was  '  Requiem  geternam  dona  ei 
Domine  et  lux  perpetua  luceat,'  and  the  other  was  '  Requiescat  in 
pace.  Amen.'  Some  persons  would  call  these  expressions  prayers 
for  the  dead ;  other  persons  might  call  them  simply  the  expressions 
of  a  pious  wish  on  the  part  of  the  friends  of  the  deceased.  In  any 
case,  these  two  expressions  occurred  in  the  old  service-books  of  the 
Church  of  England,  the  old  Sarum  books,  in  the  obsequies  for  the 
dead.  There  the  first  of  the  expressions  was  the  verse  or  refrain 
which  occurred  over  and  over  again,  and  the  other  expression  was 
the  final  words  of  the  Service  for  the  Burial  of  the  Dead.  If  this 
were  an  application  for  a  faculty  for  a  new  memorial  tablet,  or  new 
monument  to  be  put  up  in  this  church,  there  might  be  circumstances 
which  would  lead  the  Court  to  pause  a  good  deal  before  granting 
the  faculty.  ...  If  there  was  anything  in  this  inscription  contrary 
to  the  doctrine  or  the  laws  of  the  Church,  this  Court  would  be  bound 
not  to  grant  the  faculty  ;  but  he  did  not  think  there  was  anything 
here  contrary  to  the  doctrine  or  the  laws  of  the  Church  of  England. 
Whether  in  later  days  people  were  more  afraid  of  superstition  with 
regard  to  these  prayers  for  the  dead  than  they  were  about  that  period 
at  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century  he  was  not  prepared  to  say, 
but,  at  all  events,  this  proposition  was  simply  to  take  a  memorial 
tablet  which  had  been  in  a  sacred  place,  and  to  place  it,  not  in  a 
secular  place  like  a  museum,  but  in  a  sacred  position  in  the  church. 
He  understood  that  it  was  the  wish  of  the  family  of  Fletcher,  as 
well  as  the  expressed  wish  of  the  parishioners  in  Vestry,  that  this 
tablet  should  be  placed  in  the  new  church.  He  saw  no  objection  to 
it,  and  though  it  was  undoubtedly  an  important  question,  and,  as  he 
had  said,  one  which  if  it  came  before  the  Court  in  a  different  form 


132  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

and  under  different  circumstances  might  call  for  a  different  decision, 
he  had  no  hesitation  in  decreeing  that  the  faculty  shall  issue  for  the 
memorial  tablet  to  be  placed  in  the  position  as  requested  in  the 
petition."  ^ 

In  his  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  first  issued  in  1839, 
Dr.  Pusey  dealt  with  the  subject  of  sins  committed  after 
Baptism,  but  never  recommended  Auricular  Confession  as 
a  remedy.  This  silence,  no  doubt,  was  in  accordance  with 
the  Tractarian  doctrine  of  "  Reserve  in  Communicating 
Religious  Knowledge."  ^  At  that  early  period  it  would 
never  have  done  to  have  recommended  Auricular  Confes- 
sion publicly,  above  all  in  a  pamphlet  written  to  refute  the 
charge  of  Romanising  tendencies.  Yet,  from  statements 
subsequently  made  by  Pusey  himself,  we  learn  that  he 
commenced  the  practice  of  hearing  Confessions  in  1838.^ 
From  that  date  down  to  the  time  of  his  death  he  was  one 
of  the  most  active  of  his  party  in  labours  as  a  Father 
Confessor.  Yet,  strange  as  it  may  seem  to  many,  although 
one  of  the  foremost  in  urging  others  to  practise  Auricular 
Confession,  he  never  went  to  Confession  himself  until 
about  eight  years  after  he  commenced  to  practise  as  a 
Father  Confessor.  In  1844  he  wrote  to  Keble  : — "  I  am  so 
shocked  at  myself,  that  I  dare  not  lay  my  wounds  bare  to 
any  one  ;  since  I  have  seen  the  benefit  of  Confession  to 
others,  I  have  looked  round  whether  I  could  unburthen 
myself  to  any  one,  but  there  is  a  reason  against  every  one. 
I  dare  not  so  shock  people ;  and  so  I  go  on,  having  no 
such  comfort  as  in  good  Bp.  Andrewes'  words,  to  confess 
myself  '  an  unclean  worm,  a  dead  dog,  a  putrid  corpse.' "  * 
He  waited  for    more   than    two    years    after  writing  this 

^  Record,  September  7,  1900,  p.  856. 

"^  The  Rev.  John  Thomas,  writing  to  the  future  Lord  Selborne,  in  1843,  ^ft^"^ 
mentioning  that  he  had  met  the  Rev.  Frederick  Faber  at  Rome,  proceeds: — 
"  This  reminds  me  of  the  Tract  theology.  I  think  you  draw  too  much  distinction 
between  the  views  of  the  outposts  of  that  school  and  those  of  its  leaders.  I  appre- 
hend the  only  difference  to  be,  that  the  leaders  have  the  prudence  to  defer  the  down- 
right avowal  of  extreme  opinions  until  things  are  better  prepared  for  their  reception. 
I  never  read  a  writing  of  Newman  in  the  Tracts,  in  which  he  did  not  appear  to 
me  to  insinuate,  '  I  could  carry  the  principle  much  further,  but  you  cannot  bear 
it  now.'" — Memorials,  Family  and  Personal,  1766-1865,  vol.  i.  p.  387. 

*  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  iii.  pp.  269,  335.     Times,  November  29,  1866. 

*  Ibid.  p.  96. 


PUSEY    MAKES    HIS    FIRST    CONFESSION  1 33 

before  he  could  muster  up  courage  to  go  to  Confession  ; 
at  last,  on  December  i,  1846,  he  made  his  first  Confession 
to  Keble  at  Hursley.^ 

And  here  comes  in  a  strange  fact.  Four  years  after 
Pusey  had  commenced  to  hear  Confessions,  he  wrote  a 
learned  treatise,  in  the  form  of  a  lengthy  note  to  the 
works  of  Tertullian,  in  the  Library  of  the  Fathers,  to  prove 
that  in  the  early  history  of  the  Christian  Church  there  is 
not  to  be  found  the  slightest  trace  of  private  Confession 
to  priests,  and  that  "  if  a  Church  have  laid  it  aside,  there 
is  no  ground  for  misgiving,  as  though  it  had  parted  with 
anything  essential  to  the  benefits  of  absolution."  ^  But 
he  adds  that  "  it  does  not  follow  that  because  it  was  not 
practised  in  the  early  Church,  it  may  not  be  a  salutary  check 
in  the  degraded  state  in  which  the  Church  now  is  "  ;  thus 
giving  to  Auricular  Confession  a  purely  ecclesiastical  and 
human  origin  and  not  any  divine  authority.  It  was  of 
man,  not  of  God.  From  what  Pusey  has  to  say  about 
the  early  Church  and  Confession  of  sin  to  God  only,  I  take 
the  following  extracts  which,  though  lengthy,  are  well 
worthy  of  careful  study,  as  proving  conclusively  that  the 
Primitive  Church  was  thoroughly  Protestant  on  this  great 
and  most  important  subject : — 

"^.  Chrysostome  also  in  the  passages  cited  [by  Romanists]  to  prove 
private  Confession,  shews  that  the  sins  of  the  people  were  unknojvn  to  the 
priests.  But  besides  these,  there  is  other  distinct  evidence  that  Con- 
fession was  not  regarded  as  essential  to  remission.  This  is  chiefly 
furnished  by  S.  Chrysostome,  who  yet,  as  alleged  by  Bellarmine, 
recommends  public  penitence,  and  himself  enforced  it ;  still  he  most 
distinctly  alleges  that  Confession  to  God  suffices  for  forgiveness,  and 
this  so  repeatedly,  and  so  strongly,  as  to  leave  no  question  as  to  his 
meaning.  Certainly  no  words  could  be  used,  which  should  exclude 
any  other  meaning,  if  his  do  not.  Thus  he  says  : —  .  .  .  'Confess 
to  God  alotie  thy  sins ;  "  against  Thee  only  have  I  sinned,  and  done 
evil  before  Thee,"  and  thy  sin  is  forgiven.'  .  .  .  This  language  he 
uses  in  other  places  as  even  with  reference  to  grievous  sins, 
fornication  or  adultery,  *  if  he  [the  sinner]  will  converse  alone  with 
Him,  no  one  knowing,  and  will  utter  everything  accurately,  he  shall 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  iii.  p.  103. 

2  Library  of  the  Fathers:  Tertutliatt,  p.  407.     Oxford  :  1842. 


134  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

soon  repair  his  offences ' ;  and  putting  the  words  in  the  very  mouth 
of  God,  '  I  compel  thee  not,  He  saith,  to  come  into  the  midst  of  a 
theatre,  surrounded  by  many  witnesses.  Tell  Me  alone  thy  shi  apart, 
that  I  may  heal  the  sore,  and  free  from  the  pain.'  Again,  in  a 
passage  remarkable  for  acknowledging  what  Romanists  seem  to 
forget,  that  there  is  shame  in  confessing  sin  at  all,  even  though  man 
be  not  by,  if  any  but  realise  what  his  defilements  are,  and  how  holy 
God  is :  '  But  thou  art  ashamed  and  blushest  to  utter  thy  sins,  nay, 
but  even  were  it  necessary  to  utter  these  things  before  men  and 
display  them,  not  even  thus  shouldst  thou  be  ashamed  (for  sin,  not 
to  confess  sin,  is  shame),  but  now  it  is  not  even  necessary  to  confess 
before  witnesses.  Be  the  examination  of  transgressions  in  the 
thoughts  of  conscience.  Be  the  judgment  seat  unwitnessed.  Let 
God  alone  see  thee  confessing^  .  .  .  Again,  in  the  same  contrast  with 
*a  theatre'  and  'witnesses,'  he  says  :  '  Within,  in  the  conscience,  none 
being  present  except  the  All-seeing  God,  enter  into  judgment  and 
examination  of  sins'  .  .  .  'For  why  art  thou  ashamed  and 
blushest  to  tell  thy  sins  ?  Tellest  thou  them  to  man,  that  he  may 
reproach  thee?  Confessest  thou  to  thy  fellow-servant,  that  he  may 
make  a  show  of  thee  ?  Thou  shoivest  the  ivound  to  the  Lord,  who 
careth  for  thee.  The  Friend,  The  Physician '  .  .  .  '  I  do  not  bring 
thee  into  any  theatre  of  thy  fellow-servants,  nor  compel  thee  to 
reveal  thy  sins  to  men ;  unfold  thy  conscience  to  God,  and  of  Him  ask 
the  remedies.  .  .  .' 

"There  could,"  continues  Dr.  Pusey,  "if  Romanists  would  fairly 
consider  this,  be  no  way  in  which  Confession  to  God  alone,  exclusive 
of  man,  could  be  expressed,  if  not  here.  S.  Chrysostome  says,  '  to 
God  alone,'  'ajart  in  private,'  *  to  Him  who  knoweth  beforehand,' 
'no  one  knowing,'  'no  one  present  save  Him  who  knoweth,'  'God 
alone  seeing,'  'unwitnessed,'  'not  to  man,'  'not  to  a  fellow-servant/ 
'within,'  'in  the  conscience,'  'in  the  memory,'  'judging  thyself 
(in  lieu  of  the  priest  being  the  judge)."  ^ 

"The  instances,  then,  being  in  each  case  very  numerous,  the 
absence  of  any  mention  of  Confession  in  the  early  Church  under  the 
following  circumstances  does,  when  contrasted  with  the  uniform 
mention  of  it  in  the  later,  put  beyond  question  that  at  the  earlier  period 
it  was  not  the  received  practice.  The  evidence  is  given  at  great  length 
by  Daille.  (i)  'Secret  confes-ion  has,  among  the  modern  Latins,  a 
chief  place  in  the  religious  acts  of  all  the  faithful ;  clergy,  monks, 
lay ;  princes,  private  persons ;  nobles,  people ;  men  and  women ; 
but  nowhere  in  the  Ancient  Church^  (D.  iv.  3);  'especially  at  the 
close  of  life,  as  a  bounden  duty,  it  is  universal  among  the  moderns, 

^  Libraiy  of  the  FatJiers  :   Tertiillian,  pp.  398-401. 


NO   AURICULAR    CONFESSION    IN    THE    EARLY    CHURCH     1 35 

unknown  among  the  ancients^  (ibid.  c.  5)  .  .  ,  and  certainly  the 
details  are  given  so  fully,  that  it  is  inconceivable  that  the  practice 
of  Confession  should  have  been  so  uniformly  mentioned  with 
praise  in  the  later,  and  wholly  omitted  /«  the  earlier  Church, 
had  the  practice  of  the  earlier  been  the  same  as  that  of  the  later."  ^ 

Now,  I  may  well  ask  here,  could  any  one  who  first 
read  this  splendid  defence  of  the  Protestant  position  with 
reference  to  Auricular  Confession,  have  imagined  that  its 
author  was  at  the  very  period  when  he  wrote  hearing 
Confessions  himself  ?  Pusey's  treatise,  no  doubt,  tended 
to  blind  the  eyes  of  Protestant  Churchmen  as  to  what  was 
going  on,  and  to  put  them  off  their  guard.  Who  could 
then  have  thought  it  possible  that,  within  a  very  few  years 
after  writing  this,  Pusey  would  himself  have  adopted  the 
full  Roman  Catholic  theory  and  practice  of  the  Sacrament 
of  Penance  ?  In  later  life,  Pusey  never  attempted,  so  far 
as  I  am  aware,  to  refute  the  splendid  Protestant  arguments 
against  Auricular  Confession  which  he  brought  forward 
in  his  notes  to  the  works  of  Tertullian. 

The  Tractarian  Movement  continued  to  make  rapid 
progress,  greater  indeed  than  its  founders  had  ever  anti- 
cipated. Young  clergymen,  filled  with  High  Church 
ideas,  went  down  from  Oxford  to  their  various  curacies 
throughout  the  length  and  breadth  of  the  land,  and  helped 
to  propagate  Tractarian  views  by  preaching  and  private 
conversation,  and  especially  by  assisting  in  the  circulation 
of  each  new  number  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times  as  it  came 
out.  These  were  read,  not  only  in  Rectories  and  Vicar- 
ages, but  also  in  the  Halls  of  county  noblemen  and  squires. 
There  was  a  delightful  novelty  about  this  new  system  of 
religion  which  pleased  and  attracted  the  young,  and  need- 
less to  add,  it  was  very  dear  to  the  hearts  of  the  priest- 
hood. It  was  found  peculiarly  suited  to  the  spiritual 
tastes  of  those  who  wished  to  have  a  high  opinion  of 
human  merit  in  the  sight  of  God  ;  and  it  was  soon  found, 
by  experience,  that  it  was  not  inconsistent  with  a  con- 
siderable amount  of  worldliness.  Before  long  the  news- 
papers began  to  discuss  the  work  going  on  in  Oxford,  and 

^  Library  of  the  Fathers:  Tertullian,  pp.  405,  406. 


136  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

it  was  even  mentioned  in  Parliament.  Publicity  is  every- 
thing for  a  new  cause,  and  this  the  Tractarians  soon  got 
in  abundance.  It  was  not  long  before  they  became 
famous  in  the  United  States,  and  in  several  of  our 
Colonies.  I  believe  that  this  success  was  mainly  due 
to  the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  though  I  do  not  by  any  means 
undervalue  the  effect  of  the  personal  influence  of  the 
leaders  at  Oxford.  As  years  passed  on  these  Tracts  became 
more  and  more  Romish  in  their  character,  and  filled  the 
hearts  of  the  rulers  of  the  Church  of  Rome  with  joy  and 
hope.  Wiseman  was  by  no  means  slow  to  realise  that, 
to  a  considerable  extent,  the  Tractarians  were  doing  his 
work,  and  doing  it  better  than  he  could  ever  hope  to  do 
it.  In  the  Dublin  Review  for  April  1838,  he  reviewed  the 
first  three  volumes  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  of  whose 
authors  he  asked,  "  Will  they  succeed  in  their  work  ? " 
To  which  his  answer  was :  "  We  firmly  believe  they 
will  ;  nay,  strange  to  say,  we  hope  so."  ^  ''  The  spiritual 
and  devotional  character  of  the  Catholic  worship  and 
religion  is,"  wrote  Wiseman,^  "  openly  avowed "  in  the 
Tracts  for  the  Times;  and  in  proof  of  this  he  cites  the 
following  statement  to  be  found  at  page  4  of  Tract  LXXL, 
written  by  Newman,  and  published  January  i,  1836. 

"The  same  feelings  which  carry  men  now  to  Dissent  will  carry 
them  to  Romanism — novelty  being  an  essential  stimulant  of  popular 
devotion  ;  and  the  Roman  system,  to  say  nothing  of  the  intrinsic 
majesty  and  truth  which  remain  in  it  amid  its  corruptions,  abound- 
ing in  this  and  other  stimulants  of  a  most  potent  and  effective 
character.  And  further,  there  will  ever  be  a  number  of  refined  and 
affectionate  minds,  who,  disappointed  in  finding  full  matter  for  their 
devotional  feelings  in  the  English  system,  as  at  present  conducted, 
betake  themselves,  through  human  frailty,  to  Rome." 

On  this  statement  of  Newman's,  Wiseman's  comment 
was  logical  and  just.  "  We  have  here,"  he  said  (including 
in  his  remarks  the  other  Tracts  for  the  Times),  "  a  clear 
confession  that,  upon  a  dozen    points,  affecting   nothing 

^  Wiseman's  Essays  on  Various  Subjects,  vol.  ii.  p.  29. 
2  Ibid.  p.  56. 


EXTRACTS    FROM    "TRACTS    FOR   THE   TIMES"        1 37 

less  than  the  constitution  of  the  Church,  and  the  autho- 
rity of  its  hierarchy,  the  grounds  upon  which  the  most 
solemn  dogmas  rest,  the  public  offices  of  the  Church, 
the  frequent  use  of  the  Eucharistic  sacrament,  the  per- 
formance of  daily  service,  the  observance  of  fasting,  and 
other  great  moral  precepts,  the  Anglican  Church,  under 
the  mask  of  a  Reformation,  contrived  to  place  things  in  a 
worse  state  than  they  were  before,  and  than  they  now  exist  in  the 
Catholic  Churchy  ^  And  here  it  may  be  useful  to  give  some 
other  quotations  from  the  Tracts  for  the  Times  which 
manifest  their  Romeward  tendencies,  omitting  for  the 
present  any  reference  to  Tract  XC.  to  be  dealt  with  later 
on : — 

"  With  these  [Foreign  Reformers]  and  the  like  men  Cranmer 
was  surrounded,  and  paid  much  deference  to  them,  as  a  man  of  no 
decision  is  wont  to  do  to  those  who  are  bent  upon  carrying  a  point. 
It  was  probably  a  fruit  of  this  influence,  that  there  came  out  from 
the  Council  in  1550  an  ill-omened  letter,  signed  by  seven  laymen, 
but  by  one  Bishop  only  (Ely)  besides  the  Archbishop,  commanding 
the  altars  to  be  taken  down,  and  tables  to  be  placed  in  their  room."  ^ 

"  Again,  from  the  Prayer  '  for  the  Church  militant '  we  have 
excluded  the  more  solemn  commendation  to  God,  and  Prayer  for 
the  Dead ;  this  is  a  moving  thought,  for  may  we  not  venture  to 
consider  it  in  this  light,  that  we  are  by  this  exclusion,  as  it  were,  in 
some  degree  disunited  from  the  purer  communion  of  those  departed 
Saints  who  are  now  with  Christ,  as  if  scarce  worthy  to  profess 
ourselves  one  with  them.'  "  ^ 

"  In  speaking  of  the  Rubric,  the  substitution  of  the  term  '■Tabled 
'Holy  Table,'  and  in  the  Scotch  of  'God's Board,'  for  that  of  'Altar^ 
which  is  in  Edward's  First  Book  (as  well  as  'God's  Board'),  is  a 
strofig  instance  of  this  our  judicial  humiliation."  ^ 

"There  is  another  circumstance  now  to  be  observed,  of  more 
importance  than  any  which  have  been  hitherto  considered,  the 
entire  omission  of  the  use  of  oil  at  Baptism  and  Confirmation.  .  .  . 
When  we  consider  these  things,  surely  no  one  can  say  [sic.  1  deny'\ 
the  greatness  of  the  gifts  which  are  here  withdrawn ;  how  much  we 
have  thereby  fallen  from  the  high  appellations  of  '  a  royal  priesthood, 


^  Wiseman's  Essays  on  Various  Subjects,  vol.  ii.  pp.  56,  57. 

2  Tract  LXXXI.  p.  16.     By  Dr.  Pusey. 

*  Tract  LXXXVI.  p.  21.     By  the  Rev.  Isaac  Williams.         *  Ibid.  p.  26. 


138  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWAKD    MOVEMENT 

a  holy  nation,  a  peculiar  people ' :  and  we  have  together  with  it  lost 
the  white  robe  of  Baptism."  ^ 

"  In  all  these  things,^  we  have  no  reason  surely  to  complain  of 
the  judicial  withholding  of  privileges,  but  to  lament  our  unfitness  to 
receive  them ;  the  fact  is  our  '  iniquities  have  separated  between  us 
and  our  God.'  'Our  sins  have  withholden  good  things  from  us.' 
The  essentials  of  a  Church  we  have  by  many  merciful  interpositions 
still  preserved  to  us ;  they  are  only  matters  denoting  the  highest 
privileges,  royal  gifts,  that  are  ivithdrawn."  ^ 

No  one  who  reads  these  last  quotations  can  fail  to  see 
how  dissatisfied  the  early  Tractarians  were  with  the  Prayer 
Book  as  it  is,  and  how  heartily  they  would  have  welcomed 
Prayer  Book  Revision,  provided  it  were  on  Tractarian 
lines.  The  only  Revision  to  which  the  Ritualists  now 
object  is  one  on  Protestant  lines. 

In  the  year  1839  an  attempt  was  commenced  to 
influence  the  wealthy  residents  of  the  West  End  of 
London  in  favour  of  Tractarianism.  The  Rev.  Frederick 
Oakeley,  one  of  the  most  zealous  and  extreme  of  his 
party,  was  in  that  year  appointed  to  the  charge  of 
Margaret  Chapel,  near  Cavendish  Square,  in  which,  as 
he  subsequently  said,  he  sought  "  an  opportunity  of  trying 
the  effect  of  Tractarian  principles  upon  a  practical  scale." 
In  a  lecture  delivered  in  London  in  1855,  when  he  had 
become  a  Roman  Catholic  priest,  Mr.  Oakeley  told  his 
hearers  how  he  began  his  work  in  Margaret  Chapel : — 

"Pulpit  and  reading  desk,"  he  said,  "were  moved  from  their 
former  position  ;  and  the  poor  clerk  reluctantly  took  his  place  in 
the  body  of  the  chapel,  although  he  never  succeeded  to  the  last  in 
bringing  his  'Amen'  into  proper  tone  of  subordination.  The 
communion  table,  now  dignified  with  the  name  of  an  altar,  exhibited 
its  crimson  frontal,  its  cross,  and  its  candlesticks,  whose  unlighted 
candles  were  standing  memorials  of  Episcopal  inflexibility,  and 
emblems  of  patient  hope.  Not  indeed  that  they  were  always  un- 
lighted ;  for  there  came  periodically  the  succession  of  night  to  day, 

1   Trad  LXXXVI.  pp.  27,  29. 

"^  That  is,  in  the  removal  from  the  Prayer  Book  of  Prayers  for  the  Dead,  and 
the  word  "altar";  in  the  omission  from  it  also  of  the  anointing  in  Baptism 
and  Confirmation,  and  the  removal  of  the  "anointing  of  the  sick." 

8  Tract  LXXXVI.  pp.  30,  31. 


MARGARET  STREET  CHAPEL  1 39 

and  at  times  the  elements  favoured  us  with  a  propitious  fog.  All 
this,  my  friends,  must  sound  to  you  as  something  inexpressibly  absurd. 
Well,  I  cannot  justify  the  unlighted  candles,  and  still  less,  the  inor- 
dinate attachment  to  fogs.  But,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  such 
trifling  extravagances,  the  whole  thing,  I  assure  you,  liad  an  earnest- 
ness and  reality  about  it ;  as  has  been  proved,  I  think  you  will  admit, 
by  its  (then  most  unthought  of)  results.  Margaret  Chapel  has  yielded 
some  scores  of  converts  to  the  Catholic  Church,  including  four  of 
its  successive  Ministers ;  and  this,  although  it  never  aimed  at 
anything  but  to  promote  the  cause  of  the  Church  of  England.  It 
continued  to  do  its  work  long  after  I  quitted  it,  and  has  now  merged 
into  one  of  the  most  magnificent  Churches  in  England,^  which  I 
have  no  doubt  will  do  its  work  also."^ 

From  the  biography  of  Mr.  Serjeant  Bellasis,  who 
was  from  the  first  one  of  Mr.  Oakeley's  warmest  supporters 
at  Margaret  Chapel  (and  who  subsequently  seceded  to 
Rome)  we  learn  that  "  the  altar  was  raised  "  by  the  new 
Incumbent,  who  at  once  "  commenced  intoning  parts  of 
the  service  more  after  Cathedral  fashion."  ^  All  through 
Oakeley's  troubles  while  at  Margaret  Chapel,  Serjeant 
Bellasis  was  his  warmest  friend  and  disciple.  How  far 
the  Serjeant  had  gone  towards  Popery,  even  seven  years 
before  he  actually  joined  the  Church  of  Rome,  may  be 
seen  in  the  following  extract  from  a  letter  he  wrote  to  a 
friend  on  March  31,  1843: — "You  know  my  opinion 
about  the  Pope.  I  think  he  is  the  Head  of  the  Christian 
Church,  and  that  Henry  VIII.  committed  a  great  sin  in 
throwing  off  the  Pope's  authority  and  assuming  it  himself, 
and  I  wish  that  authority  were  restored."  *  Six  months 
later  Bellasis  visited  Oxford,  and  there,  amongst  the 
Tractarians  (as  he  wrote  from  there  on  Septeinber  25, 
1843): — "I  find  a  universal  acquiescence  in  the  Council  of 
Trent,  as  being  the  only  basis  upon  which  an  ultimate 
reunion  will  be  effected,  and  a  universal  admission  that  tJie 
notion  of  independent  national  Churches  is  absurd,  and  that  the 
authority  of  a  Supreme  Patriarch  is  far,  very  far  prefer- 

1  All  Saints,  Margaret  Street,  W. 

-  Fersotial  Reminiscences  of  the  Oxford  Movement.     A  Lecture  by  Frederick 
Oakeley,  M.A.,  p.  ii.     London:  1855. 

'  Memorials  of  Mr,  Serjeant  Bellasis,  p.  35. 
*  Ibid.  p.  39.  ■' 


140  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

able,  to  the  slavery  of  the  Church  to  an  almost  heathen 
state."  ^ 

Mr.  Oakeley's  labours  at  the  Margaret  Chapel  were 
soon  rewarded  with  a  considerable  measure  of  success. 
He  gathered  round  him  an  influential  congregation,  in- 
cluding many  members  of  the  aristocracy,  and  not  a  few 
of  those  who  held  high  official  positions,  amongst  the 
latter  being  Mr.  Gladstone,  the  future  Prime  Minister,^ 
who  remained  an  intimate  friend  of  Mr.  Oakeley's  until 
his  death.  Of  Margaret  Chapel  Mr.  Gladstone  once 
said  :— "  The  whole  place  was  so  filled  by  the  reverence 
of  Oakeley's  ministrations  and  manner,  that  its  bareness 
and  poverty  passed  unnoticed.  His  sermons  were  always 
most  admirable  ;  they  never  exceeded  twenty  minutes."  ^ 
The  result  was  the  accession  to  the  ranks  of  the  Tractarians 
of  many  perverts  of  considerable  influence  in  the  upper 
ranks  of  society.  The  affairs  of  the  Chapel,  under 
Oakeley's  ministrations,  appear  to  have  gone  on  pros- 
perously for  several  years.  Complaints  from  Protestant 
Churchmen  were  heard  from  time  to  time,  but  nothing 
in  the  nature  of  really  serious  opposition  was  met  with 
until  early  in  the  year  1845.  On  February  14th  of  that 
year  the  Rev.  W.  G.  Ward  was  deprived  of  his  degrees  by 
the  Convocation  of  the  University  of  Oxford  for  having, 
amongst  other  offences,  afBrmed  in  his  book.  The  Ideal  of 
a  Christian  Church,  that,  in  subscribing  the  Thirty-Nine 
Articles,  he  "renounced  no  one  Roman  doctrine."  On 
the  very  day  that  Ward  was  thus  degraded,  Oakeley  wrote 
a  letter  to  the  Vice-Chancellor  calling  his  attention  to  the 
fact  that,  six  weeks  previously,  he  had  sent  to  him  a  copy 
of  a  pamphlet  which  he  (Oakeley)  had  written,  and  in 
which  occurred  the  following  passage : — "  I  claim  the 
right,  which  has  been  already  asserted  in  another  quarter, 
of  holding  (as  distinct  from  teaching)  all  Roman  doctrine, 
and  that  notwithstanding  my  subscription  to  the  Thirty- 
Nine  Articles."  * 

^  Memorials  of  Mr.  Serjeant  Bellasis,  p.  66,  note. 

^  Purcell's  Life  of  Cardinal  Maiming,  vol.  i.  p.  314.  ^  Ibid.  p.  314. 

*  The  Subject  of  Tract  XC.  Historically  Examined.     By  Frederick  Oakeley, 
Fellow  of  Balliol  College,  Oxford,  2nd  edition,  p.  xiii.     Oakeley's  pamphlet  was 


PROSECUTION    OF    MR.    OAKELEY  141 

Mr.  Oakeley  proceeded  to  state  to  the  Vice-Chan- 
cellor  : — "  If  I  am  allowed,  after  this  plain  and  public 
declaration  of  my  sentiments,  to  retain  my  place  in  the 
University,  I  shall  regard  such  acquiescence  as  equivalent 
to  an  admission,  on  the  part  of  the  Academical  authorities, 
that  my  own  subscription  to  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles  is 
not  at  variance  with  good  faith.'  "  ^  The  fact  that  Oakeley 
had  written  this  letter  came  to  the  knowledge  of  the 
Bishop  of  London  (Dr.  Blomfield),  who  was  so  much  put 
out  about  it  that  he  immediately  requested  Oakeley  to 
resign  his  Incumbency  of  Margaret  Chapel.  Oakeley's 
friends  wrote  to  the  Bishop  in  his  favour,  amongst  them 
being  Mr.  Gladstone  and  Mr.  Justice  Coleridge.^  While 
the  decision  was  pending  Oakeley  wrote  and  published  a 
letter  to  the  Bishop  of  London,  in  the  form  of  a  pamph- 
let,^ which  led  his  lordship  to  the  decision  to  prosecute 
the  offender  in  the  Court  of  Arches.  It  was  open  to  the 
Bishop  to  have  withdrawn  Oakeley's  licence  at  once,  but 
he  thought  it  would  seem  fairer  to  proceed  against  him 
by  a  prosecution.  This  was  the  first  prosecution  brought 
against  a  member  of  the  party  to  which  Oakeley  belonged, 
and  it  is  not  a  little  interesting  to  note  that  it  was  initiated 
by  a  Bishop,  his  secretary,  Mr.  Christopher  Hodgson, 
being  the  nominal  prosecutor.  The  case  came  on  for 
hearing  in  the  Arches  Court,  on  June  9,  1845,  before  Sir 
Herbert  Jenner  Fust.^  The  portions  of  Oakeley's  Letter 
to  the  Bishop  of  London  objected  against  in  the  articles 
included  the  following  passages  : — 

"  I  do  not  deny  that  it  may  naturally  strike  your  lordship,  as  a 
gratuitous  and  disturbing  movement.     Nor,  again,  could  I  be  sur- 

ably  answered  by  the  Rev.  William  Goode  (afterwards  Dean  of  Ripon)  under  the 
title  of  Tract  XC.  Historically  Refitted,  2nd  edition,  pp.  191.  London  :  Hatchard. 
1866. 

^  Mr.  Oakeley's  letter  to  the  Vice-Chancellor  appears  in  full  in  the  English 
Churchman,  February  20,  1845,  P-  l^^- 

^  Memorials  of  Mr.  Serjcatit  Bellasis,  p.  41. 

^  A  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Lotidon  on  a  Subject  Connected  ivith  the  Recent 
Proceedings  at  Oxford.  By  the  Rev.  Frederick  Oakeley,  pp.  39.  London  : 
Toovey. 

^  A  verbatiin  copy  of  the  articles  brought  against  the  defendant,  together 
with  a  report  of  the  trial,  appears  in  the  English  Churchman,  June  12,  1S45, 
PP-  374-376. 


142  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

prised  to  hear  that  your  lordship  had  been  seriously  startled  by  my 
further  declaration  of  an  opinion,  that  the  Articles  are  subscribable  in 
what  may  be  called  an  ultra-Catholic  sense,  so  as  to  involve  no 
necessary  renunciation  on  the  subscriber's  part,  of  any  formril  de- 
cision of  the  Western  Church,  and  that  I  myself,  actually  so 
subscribed  them."  ^ 

"  And  now  I  wish  to  draw  your  lordship's  attention  to  the  follow- 
ing point.  The  distinction  in  question  is,  as  I  contend,  wholly 
irrelevant  to  my  question  with  the  University,  for,  in  the  University, 
it  is  not  the  practice  of  teaching  certain  doctrines  which  is  even 
apparently  impugned,  but  the  claim  to  hold  them.  Mr.  Ward  him- 
self never  claimed  to  teach  Roman  doctrine  ;  on  the  contrary,  he  urges 
over  and  over  again  that  such  a  procedure  would  be  highly  wrong 
under  our  circumstances.  What  he  maintains,  and  what  the  vote 
of  Thursday  seems  to  deny,  is  the  honesty  of  subscribing  the  Articles 
in  a  certain  sense.  The  University,  then,  cannot  pretend  to  let  me 
off  on  the  ground  of  the  above  distinction ;  for  with  respect  to  it  I 
differ  in  no  way  from  Mr.  Ward,  whom  it  has,  by  hypothesis,  con- 
demned.    Mr.   IVard  does  not  claim  to  teach,     /claim  to  hold. 

"  But,  with  your  lordship,  I  contend  this  distinction  ought  to, 
and  will,  receive  consideration.  Were  I  to  be  found  teaching  Roman 
doctrine  in  my  public  ministrations  in  your  lordship's  diocese,  I 
should,  as  I  feel,  most  deservedly  expose  myself  to  your  lordship's 
censure.  It  is  plain  that  your  lordship,  as  a  Bishop  of  our  Church, 
could  not,  and  would  not,  suffer  it."  ^ 

At  the  hearing  of  the  case  in  the  Court  of  Arches 
Mr.  Oakeley  was  undefended,  but  that,  of  course,  was  his 
own  fault,  since  he  does  not  seem  to  have  pleaded  any 
conscientious  objections  to  recognising  the  Court  of 
Arches.  Sir  Herbert  Jenner  Fust  delivered  his  judgment 
in  the  case,  on  June  30,  1845  : — 

"  The  learned  judge  had  no  doubt  that  the  promoters  of  the 
office  had  sufficiently  proved  the  articles,  and  that  Mr.  Oakeley  had 
advisedly  maintained  and  affirmed  doctrines  directly  contrary  and 
repugnant  to  those  of  the  Church  of  England,  so  as  to  render  him- 
self liable  to  ecclesiastical  censure.  If  the  proceeding  had  been 
under  the  statute  of  Elizabeth,  he  must,  in  the  first  instance,  have 
been  called  upon  to  retract  his  error,  and  if  he  refused,  be  deprived 
of  his  preferment;  but,  as  the  proceeding  was  under  the  general 

^  Oakeley 's  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  London,  p.  Ii. 
^  Lbid.  pp.  12,  13. 


JUDGMENT    AGAINST    MR.    OAKELEY  143 

law,  the  punishment  was  left  to  the  discretion  of  the  Court,  accord- 
ing to  the  exigency  of  the  offence. 

"What  the  amount  of  that  punishment  should  be  he  had  now 
to  consider,  and  in  that  consideration  he  must  bear  in  mind  the 
necessity  of  inflicting  such  a  punishment  as  would  prevent  others 
from  falling  into  those  errors  of  which  Mr.  Oakeley  was  guilty.  He 
believed  that  the  Court  would  not  go  beyond  the  justice  of  the  case 
if  it  revoked  the  licence  of  Mr.  Oakeley  to  officiate  in  Margaret 
Chapel,  or  elsewhere  in  the  Diocese  of  London,  and  if  it  prohibited 
him  from  performing  any  ministerial  offices  within  the  Province  of 
Canterbury  until  he  retracted  his  errors.  He  should  also  condemn 
Mr.  Oakeley  in  the  cost  of  these  proceedings.^ 

The  Church  of  England  is  much  indebted  to  Bishop 
Blomiield  for  the  courageous  and  faithful  attitude  he 
assumed  towards  Mr.  Oakeley.  The  Bishop  was  not  an 
Evangelical,  but  rather  an  old-fashioned  High  Churchman, 
yet  he  could  not  fail  to  see  a  grave  danger  to  the  Church 
in  allowing  a  man  like  Oakeley  to  flaunt  his  defiant 
Popery  in  the  face  of  her  rulers.  The  punishment  in- 
flicted upon  the  Minister  of  Margaret  Chapel  was  severe, 
but  it  was  thoroughly  deserved,  and  it  was  effectual  in 
preventing  a  repetition  of  the  offence.  Why  is  it,  we  may 
well  ask,  that  the  Bishops  of  the  present  generation  have 
not  the  courage  to  imitate  Bishop  Blomfield's  example  ? 
What  an  unhappy  exhibition  of  unfaithfulness  on  their 
part  is  revealed  in  the  Archbishop  of  York's  Advent  Pas- 
toral, issued  in  1899.  "  It  has  been  widely  stated,"  said 
the  Archbishop,  "  in  various  quarters,  that  the  Bishops 
have  determined  to  prosecute  the  nonconforming  clergy. 
Such  rumours  are  circulated,  from  whatever  motive,  with- 
out the  slightest  authority.  /  do  not  believe  that  there  is  a 
single  Bishop  ivho  ivoidd  think  of  taking  such  a  step,  although, 
unquestionably,  this  lies  within  our  power." 

Dr.  Pusey  was  made  very  angry  by  Sir  Herbert  Jenner 
Fust's  judgment.  He  wrote  two  long  letters  to  the  English 
Churchman  finding  fault  with  it,  and  urging  that,  because 
Mr.  Oakeley  was  undefended,  the  judgment  "  has  morally 
no  force  upon  the  conscience,  as  legally,  none  as  a  prece- 

^  English  Churchman,  July  3,  1845,  P-  4^2. 


144  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

dent  in  law."  ^  But  here  it  may  be  asked  what  ecclesi- 
astical judgment  delivered  since  1845  has  been  considered 
by  Pusey's  followers  to  have  any  moral  "  force  upon  the 
conscience,"  when  it  conflicted  with  their  teaching  and 
conduct  ?  In  the  very  first  case  of  a  prosecution  against 
a  member  of  their  party,  this  plea  was  set  up,  and  against 
a  Spiritual  Court  too  ;  and  it  has  been  set  up  in  every 
other  case  tried  since  then.  The  plea  set  up  by  Dr.  Pusey 
that  a  judgment  has  "  morally  no  force  upon  the  con- 
science," when  the  prosecuted  one  wilfully  and  inexcusably 
chooses  not  to  defend  himself,  is  simply  absurd.  If  this 
plea  were  permitted  in  criminal  courts  every  prisoner  at 
the  bar  would  escape  punishment.  And  in  this  Margaret 
Chapel  case  Pusey  set  another  bad  example  to  his  fol- 
lowers which  they  were  not  slow  to  imitate.  He  imputed 
bad  motives  to  the  prosecution.  He  wrote  : — "  When  he 
(Oakeley)  thought  it  right  to  give  up  his  cause,  he  knew 
that  he  must  be  condemned  ;  and  whether  without  any 
alleged  grounds,  simply  by  default,  or  in  other  courts,  or 
upon  wrong  grounds,  or  on  the  real  grounds,  mattered  not 
to  him  personally.  In  any  case,  he  must  be  crushed,  and  then 
it  matters  not  much  to  a  person,  why."  ^  In  defending 
Oakeley,  Pusey  was  at  the  same  time  defending  others 
who  held  the  same  ground.  He  was  anxious  to  keep  men 
holding  this  disloyal  position  within  the  English  Church, 
and  prevent  them  going  over  to  Rome,  their  natural  home. 
A  few  months  later,  Pusey  wrote  to  Dr.  Wilberforce,  then 
Bishop- Elect  of  Oxford  : — 

"  I  did  not  mean  to  state  anything  definitely  as  to  myself,  but 
only  to  maintain,  in  the  abstract,  the  tenability  of  a  certain  position,  in 
which  VERY  MANY  are,  of  not  holding  themselves  obliged  to  renounce 
any  doctrine,  forttially  decreed  by  the  Roman  Church.  And  this 
I  knew  would  satisfy  many  minds,  who  do  not  wish  to  form  any 
definite  opinion  on  those  doctrines,  yet  still  wish  not  to  be  obliged 
to  commit  themselves  against  them.  But  in  this  I  was  not  speaking 
of  what  is  commonly  meant  by  '  Popery,'  which  is  a  large  practical 
system,  going  beyond  their  formularies,  varying,  perhaps,  indefinitely 

^  English  Churchman,  October  2,  1845,  p.  627. 
*  Ibid.  p.  627. 


pusey's  faith  in  purgatory  145 

in  different  minds,  I  mean  simply  '  the  letter  of  what  has  been 
decreed  by  the  Roman  Church  ' ;  and  this  I  have,  for  years,  hoped 
might  ultimately  become  the  basis  of  union  between  us."^ 

In  this  same  letter  Pusey  showed  to  Wilberforce  what 
some  of  these  Romish  doctrines  were  which  English 
Churchmen  might  lawfully  hold,  and  at  the  same  time  he 
revealed  most  clearly  his  intense  longing  for  Corporate 
Reunion  with  Rome.  "  Practically,"  he  wrote,  "  when 
people  come  to  me  for  guidance,  I  endeavour  to  withhold 
them  from  what  lies  beyond  our  Church,  although,  if  asked 
on  the  other  side,  I  could  not  deny  that  such  and  such 
things  seem  to  me  admissible.  If  I  may  explain  my 
meaning,  the  remarkable  Acts  of  S.  Perpetua  and  Felicitas, 
which  was  beyond  question  genuine,  contain  a  very  solemn 
vision,  which  involves  the  doctrine  of  a  process  of  purifica- 
tion after  death  by  suffering,  to  shorten  which  prayer  was 
available  .  .  .  solemn  as  it  was,  I  could  not,  taking  all 
together,  refuse  my  belief  to  an  intermediate  state  of 
cleansing,  in  some  cases  through  pain.  .  .  .  The  effect  has 
been  that  /  have  since  been  wholly  silent  about  Purgatory  (before 
I  used  to  speak  against  it).  I  have  not  said  as  much  as 
this  except  to  two  or  three  friends.  Some  of  my  nearest 
friends  do  not  know  of  it."  ^  Here  was  undoubtedly  a 
case  in  which  Pusey  acted  on  the  doctrine  of  "  Reserve  in 
Communicating  Religious  Knowledge."  And  what  are  we 
to  think  of  the  tactics  revealed  in  the  following  paragraph 
of  the  same  letter  ?  "  Practically  then,"  said  Pusey,  "  I 
dissuade  or  forbid  (when  I  have  authority)  Invocation  of 
Saints  ;  abstractedly,  I  see  no  reason  why  our  Church 
might  not  eventually  allow  it,  in  the  sense  of  asking  for 
their  prayers."  To  "  dissuade  or  forbid  "  people  practising 
that  which  he  thought  might  be  helpful,  if  introduced  into 
the  English  Church,  was  not  a  consistent  attitude  for  any 
Christian  minister  to  assume.  It  was  very  much  like 
double-faced  conduct.  And  all  this  belief  in  Popery  was 
to  be  tolerated  in  the  English  Church  with  a  view  to 
assisting  its  Reunion  with  Rome.     "  I  cannot  but  think," 

^  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  i.  p.  303. 
2  Ibid.  pp.  304,  305. 


146  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

wrote  Pusey,  in  the  same  letter  to  Wilberforce,  "  that 
Rome  and  we  are  not  irreconcilably  at  variance,  but  that, 
in  the  impending  contest  with  unbelief,  we  shall  be  on  the 
same  side,  and  in  God's  time,  and  in  His  way,  one." 

A  few  months  after  the  judgment  of  Sir  Herbert  Jenner 
Fust,  Mr.  Oakeley  seceded  to  the  Church  of  Rome.  Shortly 
before  that  event  he  wrote  from  Littlemore,on  October  23rd, 
a  letter  for  publication — just  a  fortnight  after  Newman  had 
announced  his  own  secession  in  the  same  village — in  which 
he  stated  that  he  was  about  to  join  the  Church  of  Rome, 
and  in  which  he  revealed  the  object  he  had  in  view  while 
labouring  as  a  clergyman  in  the  Church  of  England  : — 
"  To  bring  my  own  Church^'  he  wrote,  "  into  the  utmost  pos- 
sible sympathy  and  harmony  with  the  Roman,  while  at  the  same 
time  scrupulously  observant  of  her  own  express  directions, 
and  of  the  injunctions  of  authority  (as  far  as  I  could  collect 
them),  this,  as  you  well  know,  was  my  idea  of  the  truest  loyalty 
towards  the  Church  of  England."  ^ 

^  A  Letter  On  Submitting  to  the  Catholic  Church.     By  Frederick  Oakeley, 
M.A,,  2nd  edition,  p.  34.     London  :  James  Toovey.     1845. 


CHAPTER    VI 

Tract  XC. — List  of  pamphlets  on  Tj-act  A'C— Newman's  object  in 
writing  the  Tract — Extracts  from  it^Rejoicings  at  Oscott — The  letter 
of  the  Four  Tutors— Dr.  Arnold's  opinion  of  the  Tract — Declaration 
by  the  Heads  of  Houses — Interesting  letter  from  one  of  the  Four 
Tutors — Newman's  Letter  to  Dr.Jelf — Wiseman's  attitude  towards 
the  advanced  Tractarians — Ward's  traitorous  letter  to  the  Univers 
— An  English  Catholic's  letter  to  Newman — Wiseman's  reply  to 
Newman — Mr.  Ambrose  Lisle  Phillipps'  letter — The  Bishop  of  Ox- 
ford's difficulties — His  correspondence  with  Pusey  and  Newman — 
The  Tracts  for  the  Ti»ies  discontinued — Newman's  Letter  to  the 
Bishop  of  Oxford — Newman  withdraws  his  "dirty  words"  against 
Rome — His  reasons  for  doing  so — The  Rev.  William  George  Ward 
— Thinks  the  Reformers  guilty  of  rebellion  and  perjury — Mr. 
Percival's  defence  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times — Keble's  defence  of 
Tract  XC. — His  opinion  on  Canonical  Obedience  to  the  Bishops — 
Pusey's  defence  of  Tract  XC. — Manning's  dislike  for  Tract  XC. — 
Bricknell's  Judgment  of  the  Bishops  upon  Tractarian  Theology — 
What  the  Bishops  said  against  Tract  XC. 

Probably  Newman  never  created  a  greater  sensation  in 
his  life — his  secession  to  Rome  excepted — than  when  he 
wrote  Tract  XC.  The  number  of  pamphlets  written  on 
this  one  Tract  alone,  by  friend  and  foe,  was  very  large.  I 
have  not  seen  them  all,  but  for  the  purpose  of  reference 
my  readers  may  find  useful  the  subjoined  list  of  those  in 
my  possession.  ^ 

^  I.  Tract  XC.  *'  Remarks  on  Certain  Passages  in  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles," 
pp.83.  London:  Rivington.  1841.  Reprinted,  "With  a  Historical  Preface 
by  the  Rev.  E.  B.  Pusey,  D.D."     London  :  Parker.     1865. 

2.  A  Letter  to  the  Rev.  R.  IV.Jelf,  D.D.,  In  Explanation  of  No.  90.  By  the 
Author,  pp.  31.     Oxford  :  Parker.      1841. 

3.  A  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  On  Occasion  of  Tract  XC.  By  John 
Henry  Newman,  pp.  47.     Oxford  :  Parker.     1841. 

4.  The  Articles  Treated  on  in  Tract  XC.  Reconsidered  and  their  Interpretation 
Vindicated.  In  a  Letter  to  the  Rev.  R.  W.  Jelf,  D.D.  By  the  Rev.  E.  B.  Pusey, 
D.D.,  pp.  217.     Oxford  :  Parker.     1841. 

5.  A  Letter  to  the  Rev.  E.  B.  Pusey,  D.D.,  On  the  Publication  of  No.  90  of  the 
Tracts  for  the  Times.  By  William  Sewell,  M.A.,  Professor  of  Moral  Philosophy, 
pp.  13.     Oxford:  Parker.    1841. 

6.  Some  Remarks  on  A  Letter  Addressed  to  the  Rev,  R.  W.Jelf  D.D.,  in  Ex- 

147 


148  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

It  was  no  new  idea  of  Newman's  to  write  a  book  about 
the  Thirty-Nine  Articles.  He  had  considered  the  subject 
more  than  two  years  before  the  start  of  the  Oxford  Move- 
ment. "  I  had,"  he  wrote  to  the  Rev.  H.  J.  Rose,  on 
March  28,  1831,  "considered  a  work  on  the  Articles 
might  be  useful  on  the  following  plan :  First,  a  defence  of 
Articles  ;  then  the  history  of  our  own.    Then  an  explanation 

planation  of  No.  90.   By  Ambrose  Lisle  Phillipps,  Esq.,  pp.  24.    London  :  Charles 
Dolman.     1841. 

7.  A  Letter  Respectfully  Addressed  to  the  Rev.  J.  H.  Newman  Upon  Some 
Passages  in  his  Letter  to  the  Rev.  Dr.  Jelf.  By  N.  Wiseman,  D.D.,  Bishop  of 
Melipotamus,  pp.  32.     London  :  Charles  Dolman.     1841. 

8.  A  Letter  to  N.  Wiseman,  D.D.,  containing  Remarks  On  his  Letter  to  Mr. 
Newman.  By  the  Rev.  William  Palmer,  M.A.,  Worcester  College,  Oxford, 
pp.49.     Oxford:  Parker.     1841. 

9.  Strictures  on  No.  90  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times.  By  a  Member  of  the 
University  of  Oxford.     Part  L  pp.  76.     Oxford  :  J.  Vincent. 

10.  Strictures  on  No.  90  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times.  By  a  Member  of  the 
University  of  Oxford.     Part  IL  pp.  95.     Oxford  :  J.  Vincent.     1841. 

11.  Two  Letters  Concerning  No.  90  in  the  Series  called  Tracts  for  the  Times. 
Printed  for  Private  Distribution  Only,  pp.  31.  Oxford:  Printed  by  W.  Baxter. 
1841. 

12.  The  Controversy  between  Tract  XC.  and  the  Oxford  Tutors,  pp.  32. 
London  :  How  &  Parsons.     1841. 

13.  Brief  Remarks  upon  No.  90,  Second  Edition,  and  some  Subsequent  Pub- 
lications in  Defence  oj  it.  By  the  Rev.  C.  P.  Golightly,  M.A.,  pp.  19.  Oxford  : 
William  Graham.     1841. 

14.  The  Case  of  Catholic  Subscription  to  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles.  By  the 
Rev.  John  Keble,  M.A.,  pp.  38.  "London:  1841.  Not  Published."  Reprinted 
by  Dr.  Pusey,  in  1865,  with  Tract  XC. 

15.  A  Vindication  of  the  Principles  of  the  Authors  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Ti?nes. 
By  the  Hon.  and  Rev.  A.  P.  Percival,  B.C.L.,  pp.  33.  London:  Rivington. 
1841. 

16.  Certain  Documents,  &'c.,  (^c,  Connected  zuith  the  Tracts  for  the  Times 
No.  90,  pp.  18.     Oxford  :  Printed  by  W.  Baxter.     1841. 

17.  Some  Documents,  &^c.,  &'c.,  Connected  with  the  Tracts  for  the  Times, 
3rd  edition,  pp.  15.     Oxford  :  W.  Graham.     1841. 

18.  Oxford  or  Rome?  A  Letter  to  the  Rev.  J.  H.  N'ewfnan  On  No.  90  of 
the  Tracts  for  the  Times.  By  an  English  Catholic,  pp.  32.  London  :  James 
Ridgway.     1 84 1. 

19.  A  Letter  to  the  Rev.  T.  T.  Churton,  M.A.  By  the  Rev.  H.  B.  Wilson, 
St.  John's  College,  Oxford,  2nd  edition,  pp.  31.     Oxford  :  W.  Graham.     1841. 

20.  A  Few  Words  in  Support  of  No.  90,  partly  with  Reference  to  Mr. 
Wilson's  Letter.  By  the  Rev.  William  George  Ward,  M.A.,  pp.  48.  London  : 
Parker.     1841. 

2\.  A  Few  More  Words  in  Support  of  No.  90.  By  the  Rev.  William  George 
Ward,  M. A.,  pp.  91.     Oxford  :  Parker.     1841. 

22.  Observations  Suggested  by  a  Ftw  More  Words  in  Support  of  No.  90.  By 
Robert  Lowe,  Esq.,  Magdalen  College  (afterwards  Lord  Sherbrooke),  pp.  24. 
Oxford:   W.  Baxter.      184 1. 

23.  The  Thirty-Nine  Articles  Considered  Chiefly  with  Reference  to  the  Views 
of  Trad  No.  90.  A  Lecture  by  Godfrey  Faussett,  D.D.,  Lady  Margaret  Professor 
of  Divinity,  pp.  44.     Oxford:  Parker.      1841. 

24.  The  Subject  of  Tract  XC.  Examined.  By  the  Rev.  Frederick  Oakeley, 
M. A.,  pp.  84.     London:  Rivington.     1841. 


WHY    NEWMAN    WROTE   TRACT    XC.  1 49 

of  them  founded  on  the  historical  view."  ^  He  was  evidently 
acquainted  at  least  with  the  existence  of  Santa  Clara's  book 
(on  whose  lines  Trad  XC.  was  written)  as  early  as  1835.^ 
Newman  says  that  one  motive  which  he  had  in  view  when 
writing  this  Trad  "  was  the  desire  to  ascertain  the  ultimate 
points  of  contrariety  between  the  Roman  and  Anglican 
Creeds,  and  /o  make  them  as  few  as  possible."  ^  And  then  he 
had  a  difficulty : — "  I  was  embarrassed  in  consequence  of 
my  wish  to  go  as  far  as  was  possible  in  interpreting  the 
Articles  in  the  diredion  of  Roman  dogma,  without  disclosing 
what  I  was  doing  to  the  parties  whose  doubts  I  was  meet- 
ing." ^  Many  of  his  followers  could  not  see  how,  with  the 
views  they  held,  they  could  consistently  sign  the  Articles, 
and  consequently  they  were  tempted,  for  the  sake  of  being 
honest  and  consistent,  to  go  over  to  Rome.  Tract  XC.  was 
written  to  keep  them  in  the  Church  of  England,  so  as  to 
further  Newman's  great  scheme  of  Corporate  Reunion  with 
Rome.     The  italics  in  the  next  quotation  are  Newman's  : — 

"  It  was  thrown  in  our  teeth,"  says  Newman,  "  *  How  can  you 
manage  to  sign  the  Articles?  they  are  directly  against  Rome.' 
'Against  Rome?'  I  made  answer;  'what  do  you  mean  by  "Rome"'? 
and  then  I  proceeded  to  make  distinctions,  of  which  I  shall  now  give 
an  account. 

"By  'Roman  doctrine'  might  be  meant  one  of  three  things:  i, 
the  Catholic  teaching  of  the  early  centuries  ;  or  2,  the  formal  dogmas 
of  Home  as  contained  in  the  later  Councils,  especially  the  Council  of 
Trent,  and  as  condensed  in  the  Creed  of  Pope  Pius  IV. ;  3,  the 
actual  popular  deliefs  and  usages  sa.nctioned  by  Rome  in  the  countries 
in  communion  with  it,  over  and  above  the  dogmas ;  and  these  I 
called  'dominant  errors.'  Now  Protestants  commonly  thought  that 
in   all   three   senses    '  Roman   doctrine '   was    condemned    in   the 

25.  T/ie  Si{bject  of  Tract  XC.  Historically  Considered.  By  the  Rev.  Frederick 
Oakeley,  M.A.,  2nd  edition,  revised,  pp.  xvi.  87.     London :  James   Toovey. 

1845. 

26.  Tract  XC.  Historically  Refuted.  A  Reply  to  the  Rev.  F.  Oakeley.  By 
William  Goode,  M.A.,  Dean  of  Ripon,  2nd  edition,  pp.  iv.  191.  London : 
Hatcliard.     1S66. 

27.  Oxford:  Tract  No.  90  and  JVard's  Ideal  of  a  Christian  Church.  By 
the  Rev.  W.  Simcox  Bricknell,  M.A.,  3rd  edition,  pp.  69.  Oxford  :  J,  Vincent. 
1844. 

1  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  i.  p.  239. 
^  Ibid.  vol.  ii,  p.  147. 
^  Apologia  Pro  Vita  Sua,  p.  160. 
*  Ibid.  p.  162. 


150  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Articles  :  I  thought  that  the  Catholic  teaching  was  not  condemned  ; 
that  the  dominant  errors  were  ;  and  as  to  the  formal  dogfnas,  that 
some  were,  some  were  not,  and  that  the  line  had  to  be  drawn 
between  them.  Thus,  i,  the  use  of  Prayers  for  the  dead  was  a 
Catholic  doctrine,  not  condemned ;  2,  the  prison  of  Purgatory  was 
a  Roman  dogma, — which  was  condemned ;  but  the  infallibility  of 
Ecumenical  Councils  was  a  Roman  dogma — not  condemned;  and  3, 
the  fire  of  Purgatory  was  an  authorised  and  popular  error,  not  a 
dogma — which  was  condemned."  ^ 

This  explanation,  given  by  Newman  himself  twenty- 
three  years  after  Tract  XC.  was  written,  may  be  supple- 
mented by  a  few  extracts  from  the  document  itself.  In 
the  Introduction  the  author  was  not  ashamed  to  speak  of 
the  Church  of  England  in  terms  almost  of  contempt. 
"  Till,"  he  said,  "  her  members  are  stirred  up  to  this 
religious  course,  let  the  Church  sit  still ;  let  her  be  content 
to  be  in  bondage;  let  her  work  in  chains;  let  her  submit  to 
her  imperfections  as  a  punishment  ;  let  her  go  on  teach- 
ing with  tJie  stammering  lips  of  ambiguous  formularies  and 
inconsistent  precedents."  ^  He  boldly  maintained  that 
"  the  Articles  are  not  written  against  the  Creed  of  the  Roman 
Church,  but  against  actual  existing  errors  in  it,  whether 
taken  into  its  system  or  not."  ^ 

"These  extracts  show  not  only  what  the  Anglican  doctrine  is, 
but,  in  particular,  that  the  phrase  '  Rule  of  Faith '  is  no  symbolical 
expression  with  us,  appropriated  to  some  one  sense ;  certainly  not  as 
a  definition  or  attribute  of  Holy  Scripture.  And  it  is  important  to 
insist  upon  this,  from  the  very  great  misconceptions  to  which  the 
phrase  gives  rise.  Perhaps  its  use  had  better  be  avoided  altogether. 
In  the  sense  in    which  it  is  commonly  understood   at   this   day, 

^  Apologia  Pro  Vita  Sua,  p.  159. 

*  Tract  XC,  ist  edition,  p.  4.  In  the  2nd  edition  this  passage  was  altered 
to  read  as  follows: — "Till  we  are  stirred  up  to  this  religious  course,  let  the 
Church,  our  Mother,  sit  still ;  let  her  children  be  content  to  be  in  bondage  ;  let  us 
work  in  chains  ;  let  us  submit  to  our  imperfections  as  a  punishment  ;  let  us  go  on 
teaching  through  the  meaning  of  indeterminate  statements  and  inconsistent  prece- 
dents." The  passage  was  toned  down  because  the  author  felt  he  had  acted 
unwisely  in  going  so  far ;  but  he  expressed  no  regret  for  his  first  version,  which,  I 
believe,  more  accurately  expressed  his  real  sentiments  all  through  the  controversy 
which  it  produced. 

*  Ibid.  p.  59. 


EXTRACTS    FROM    TRACT    XC.  15I 

'  Scripture,  it  is  plain,   is  not,  on  Anglican  principles,   the  Rule  of 
Faith."  "^ 

"Now  the  first  remark  that  occurs  on  perusing  this  Article 
[XXII.]  is  that  the  doctrine  objected  to  is  '  the  Romish  doctrine.'  For 
instance,  no  one  would  suppose  that  the  Calvinistic  doctrine,  con- 
cerning Purgatory,  Pardons,  and  Image  Worship,  is  spoken  against. 
Not  every  doctrine  on  these  matters  is  a  fond  thing,  but  the  Romish 
doctrine.  Accordingly  the  Primitive  doctrine  is  not  condemned  in 
it,  unless,  indeed,  the  Primitive  doctrine  be  the  Romish,  which  must 
not  be  supposed."  ^ 

"And  further  by  'the  Romish  doctrine'  [Article  XXII. ]  is  not 
meaftt  the  Tridentine  doctrine,  because  this  Article  was  drawn  up 
before  the  decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent.^  What  is  opposed  is  the 
received  doctrine  of  the  day,  and  unhappily  of  this  day  too,  or  the 
doctrine  of  the  Roman  schools ;  a  conclusion  which  is  still  more 
clear  by  considering  that  there  are  portions  of  the  Tridentine  doc- 
trine on  these  subjects,  which  the  Article,  far  from  condemning, 
by  anticipation  approves."  ^ 

"The  pardons,  then,  spoken  of  in  the  Article  [XXII.],  are  large 
and  reckless  indulgences  from  the  penalties  of  sin  obtained  on 
money  payments."  ^ 

"This  Article  [XXV.] does  not  deny  the  five  rites  in  question  to 
be  Sacraments,  but  to  be  Sacraments  in  the  sense  in  which  Baptism 
and  the  Lord's  Supper  are  Sacraments." ** 

"  Here  [Article  XXXI.]  the  Sacrifice  of  the  Mass  is  not  spoken 


1  Tract  XC.  p.  II.  2  3id.  p.  23. 

3  This  assertion  is  ably  and  conclusively  refuted  by  Dean  Goode,  in  his  reply 
to  a  similar  assertion  made  by  the  Rev.  F.  Oakeley.  "  It  is  quite  true,"  he  writes, 
"that  the  session  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  in  which  its  decrees  respecting  Purga- 
tory, Indulgences,  Worship  of  Relics  and  Images,  and  Invocation  of  Saints  were 
laid  down,  was  posterior  to  the  revision  of  the  Articles  ;  the  latter  being  in 
January  1562-3,  and  the  former  in  December  1563.  But  not  only  was  there 
sufficient  evidence  what  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  Rome  was  upon  those 
subjects  from  other  sources,  but  in  fact  as  to  Purgatory  (Sess.  vi.  can.  30 ;  Sess, 
xxii.  c.  2.),  Indulgences  (Sess.  xxi.  c.  9),  and  Invocation  of  Saints  (Sess.  xxii. 
c.  3),  these  doctrines  had  been  distinctly  recognised  in  various  sessions  of  the 
Council  that  had  preceded  the  revision  of  the  Articles.  Indeed,  out  of  the 
twenty-five  sessions  of  the  Council,  the  Decrees  of  sixteen  (including  the  doctrines 
of  Scripture  and  Tradition,  Original  Sin,  Justification,  and  Good  Works,  the 
Sacraments,  Baptism,  the  Lord's  Supper,  &c.)  were  well  known  here  before  the 
Articles  were  originally  drawn  up  in  1552  ;  and  the  Decrees  of  twenty-two  must 
have  been  well  known  here  before  the  revision  in  January  1562-3,  the  twenty- 
second  session  having  taken  place  in  September  1562,  four  months  previous. 
And  the  only  matters  connected  with  our  present  subject  discussed  in  the  remain- 
ing three  sessions  were,  the  Sacraments  of  Order  and  Matrimony,  and  the  points 
above  mentioned.  So  utterly  incorrect  is  the  assertion  that  '  the  Decrees  of 
Trent  were  drawn  up  after  the  Articles  '  "  ( Tract  XC.  Historically  Refuted.  By 
William  Goode,  Dean  of  Ripon,  2nd  edition,  1866,  p.  77). 

4  Tract  XC.  p.  24.  »  Ibid,  p.  31.  8  /^^-^^  p_  ^^^ 


152  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

of,  in  which  the  special  question  of  doctrine  would  be  introduced ; 
but  the  '  Sacrifice  of  Masses.'  "  ^ 

"  Bishop  is  superior  to  Bishop  only  in  rank,  not  in  real  power ; 
and  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  the  head  of  the  Catholic  world,  is  not  the 
centre  of  unity,  except  as  having  a  prhriacy  of  order ^  ^ 

When  Tract  XC.  reached  the  Roman  Catholic  College 
at  Oscott,  the  Romanists  were  delighted.  The  biographer 
of  Cardinal  Wiseman  tells  us  : — "  Oscott,  as  might  be 
expected,  rejoiced.  At  last  it  seemed  that  the  Tractarians 
'  meant  business.' "  ^  Newman  wrote  the  Tract  to  keep 
■  his  followers  contented  in  the  Church  of  England.  It 
had,  as  we  are  told  by  one  of  them,  who  subsequently 
became  a  Roman  priest  [the  Rev.  W.  Lockhart]  a  directly 
opposite  effect.  Lockhart  says  : — "  On  us  young  men 
Tract  XC.  had  the  effect  of  strengthening  greatly  our 
growing  convictions  that  Rome  was  right  and  the  Church 
of  England  wrong."* 

Neither  Newman  himself,  nor  Keble,  to  whom  he 
showed  the  Tract  before  publication,  seem  to  have  anti- 
cipated that  it  would  cause  any  special  sensation.  It  was 
published  on  Saturday,  February  27,  1841,  and  at  once 
created  a  public  excitement.  As  early  as  the  8th  of 
March,  four  Tutors  of  Oxford  Colleges  addressed  an 
important  letter  on  the  subject  addressed, "  To  the  Editor 
of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times."      It  was  as  follows  : — 

"Sir, — Our  attention  having  been  called  to  No.  90  in  the  series 
of  Tracts  for  the  Times,  by  '  Members  of  the  University  of  Oxford,' 
of  which  you  are  the  editor,  the  impression  produced  upon  our 
minds  by  its  contents  is  of  so  painful  a  character,  that  we  feel  it  our 
duty  to  intrude  ourselves  briefly  on  your  notice.  This  publication  is 
entitled, '  Remarks  on  Certain  Passages  in  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles,' 
and,  as  these  Articles  are  appointed  by  the  Statutes  of  the  Univer- 
sity to  be  the  text-book  for  Tutors  in  their  theological  teaching,  we 
hope  that  the  situations  we  hold  in  our  respective  Colleges  will 


1   Tract  XC.  p.  59.  ^  /^/^/_  p_  78. 

^  Life  and  Times  of  Cardinal  Wiseman,  vol.  i.  p.  373. 

*  Article  by  the  Rev.  W.  Lockhart,  on  "Cardinal  Newman,"  in  the  Pater- 
noster Review,  October  1890,  p.  28. 


PROTESTS  OF  THE  FOUR  TUTORS         1 53 

secure  us  from  the  charge  of  presumption  in  thus  coming  forward  to 
address  you. 

"  The  Trac^has,  in  our  apprehension,  a  highly  dangerous  tendency, 
from  its  suggesting  that  certain  very  important  errors  of  the  Church 
of  Rome  are  not  condemned  by  the  Articles  of  the  Church  of 
England.  For  instance,  that  those  Articles  do  not  contain  any 
condemnation  of  the  doctrines — 

"  I.  Of  Purgatory, 

2.  Of  Pardons, 

3.  Of    the    Worshipping   and    Adoration    of    Images    and 

Relics, 

4.  Of  the  Invocation  of  Saints, 

5.  Of  the  Mass, 

"as  they  are  taught  authoritatively  by  the  Church  of  Rome,  but  only 
of  certain  absurd  practices  and  opinions  which  intelligent  Roman- 
ists repudiate  as  much  as  we  do.  It  is  intimated,  moreover,  that 
the  Declaration  prefixed  to  the  Articles,  so  far  as  it  has  any  weight 
at  all,  sanctions  this  mode  of  interpreting  them,  as  it  is  one  which 
takes  them  in  their  '  literal  and  grammatical  sense,'  and  does 
not  '  affix  any  new  sense '  to  them.  The  Tracf  would  thus  appear 
to  us  to  have  a  tendency  to  mitigate,  beyond  what  charity  requires, 
and  to  the  prejudice  of  the  pure  truth  of  the  Gospel,  the  very  serious 
differences  which  separate  the  Church  of  Rome  from  our  own,  and 
to  shake  the  confidence  of  the  less  learned  members  of  the  Church 
of  England  in  the  Scriptural  character  of  her  formularies  and 
teaching. 

"We  readily  admit  the  necessity  of  allowing  that  liberty  in 
interpreting  the  formularies  of  our  Church,  which  has  been  advo- 
cated by  many  of  its  most  learned  Bishops  and  other  eminent 
divines ;  but  this  Traci  puts  forward  new  and  startling  views  as  to 
the  extent  to  which  that  liberty  may  be  carried.  For  if  we  are 
right  in  our  apprehension  of  the  author's  meaning,  we  are  at  a  loss 
to  see  what  security  would  remain,  were  his  principles  generally 
recognised,  that  the  most  plainly  erroneous  doctrines  and  practices 
of  the  Church  of  Rome  might  not  be  inculcated  in  the  lecture  rooms 
of  the  University  and  from  the  pulpits  of  our  Churches. 

"In  conclusion,  we  venture  to  call  your  attention  to  the  im- 
propriety of  such  questions  being  treated  in  an  anonymous  pub- 
lication, and  to  express  an  earnest  hope  that  you  may  be  authorised 
to  make  known  the  writer's  name.  Considering  how  very  grave  and 
solemn  the  whole  subject  is,  we  cannot  help  thinking,  that  both  the 
Church  and  the  University  are  entitled  to  ask  that  some  person, 


154  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

besides  the  printer  and  publisher  of  the  Tract,  should  acknowledge 
himself  responsible  for  its  contents. — We  are,  sir,  your  obedient 
humble  servants, 

"T.    T.    Churton,    M.A.,    Vice-Principal    and    Tutor    of 
Brasenose  College. 
H.  B.  Wilson,  B.D.,  Fellov/  and  Senior  Tutor  of  St.  John's 

College. 
John  Griffiths,  M.A.,  Sub-Warden  and  Tutor  of  Wadham 

College. 
A.  C.  Tait,  M.A.,  Fellow  and  Tutor  of  Balliol  College. 
"Oxford,  March  8,  1841." 

The  last  to  sign  this  important  document,  the  Rev. 
A.  C.  Tait,  afterwards  became  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 
He  never  repented  of  the  part  he  then  took,  Broad 
Churchman  though  he  was.  "  Were  it  all  to  happen 
again,"  he  said  in  1880,  "I  think  I  should,  in  the  same 
position,  do  exactly  as  I  did  then."  ^ 

Mr.  Tait  sent  a  copy  of  the  Address  of  the  four  Tutors 
to  Dr.  Arnold,  Head  Master  of  Rugby,  who,  in  his  reply, 
wrote  strongly,  yet  justly,  in  the  following  terms  : — 

"  I  am  extremely  glad  that  the  Tract  has  been  so  noticed ;  yet  it 
is  to  me  far  more  objectionable  morally  than  theologically;  and 
especially  the  comment  on  the  21st  Article,  to  which  you  have  not 
alluded,  is  of  such  a  character,  that  if  subscription  to  the  21st 
Article,  justified  by  such  rules  of  interpretation,  may  be  honestly 
practised,  I  do  not  see  why  an  Unitarian  may  not  subscribe  the 
first  Article  or  the  second.  The  comparative  importance  of  the 
truths  subscribed  to  does  not  affect  the  question ;  I  am  merely 
speaking  of  the  utter  perversion  of  language  shown  in  the  Tract, 
according  to  which  a  man  may  subscribe  to  an  article  when  he 
holds  the  very  opposite  opinions — believing  what  it  denies,  and 
denying  what  it  affirms."  ^ 

The  letter  of  the  four  Tutors,  which  Newman  formally 
acknowledged  (but  to  whom  he  did  not  reveal  his  name), 
was  speedily  followed  by  the  action  of  the  Heads  of 
Houses,  at,  it  is  said,  the  instigation  of  the  Rev.  C.  P. 
Golightly  of  Oriel  College.  Mr.  Golightly  was  one  of  the 
earliest  subscribers  to  the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  and  for 
some  years  he  was  considered  as  one  of  the  Tractarian 

1  Life  of  Archbishop  Tait,  vol.  i.  p.  87,  ist  edition.  ^  Ibid.  p.  86. 


OPINION    OF   THE    HEADS    OF    HOUSES  1 55 

party,  being  on  terms  of  intimate  friendship  with  all  the 
leaders.  But,  like  others,  when  he  discovered  whither 
they  were  moving,  he  severed  his  connection  with  them. 
From  the  publication  of  Tract  XC.  he  became  one  of  the 
most  zealous  opponents  of  the  Tractarians,  and  living  to 
old  age,  in  his  later  years  also  he  took  an  active  part  in  op- 
posing the  Romanising  practices  carried  on  in  the  Diocese 
of  Oxford.     We  shall  hear  of  him  again  later  on. 

The  Heads  of  Houses  held  several  meetings  to  con- 
sider their  action.  It  is  stated  by  Canon  Liddon  that 
Newman  privately  informed  them  that  he  was  bringing 
out  in  pamphlet  form  a  defence,  or  apology,  for  Tract  XC, 
and  that  he  asked  them  to  postpone  their  decision  for  one 
day  only  until  they  had  had  an  opportunity  of  reading  his 
defence.  They  refused  to  do  so.  So  far  as  I  can  judge 
they  seem  to  have  acted  very  unadvisedly  in  this.  A 
day's  delay  would  have  done  them  no  harm,  and  it  would 
certainly  have  prevented  the  cry  of  unfairness  which  was 
raised  against  them.  Yet,  even  if  they  had  waited,  I  do 
not  think  that  Newman's  pamphlet  would  have  altered 
their  opinion  of  his  Tract,  which  opinion  was  dated  March 
15th,  and  issued  on  the  morning  of  March  i6th.  The 
resolution  was  in  the  following  terms  : — 

"At  a  Meeting  of  the  Vice-Chancellor,  Heads  of  Houses,  and 
Proctors,  in  the  Delegates'  Room,  March  15,  1841  : 

"  Considering  that  it  is  enjoined  in  the  Statutes  of  this  University 
(Tit.  iii.  Sect.  2,  Tit.  ix.  Sect.  11  §  3,  Sect.  v.  §  3)  that  every 
student  shall  be  instructed  and  examined  in  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles, 
and  shall  subscribe  to  them  ;  considering  also  that  a  Tract  has 
recently  appeared,  dated  from  Oxford,  and  entitled  'Remarks  on 
Certain  Passages  in  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles,'  being  No.  90  of  the 
Tracts  for  the  Times,  a  series  of  anonymous  publications  purporting 
to  be  written  by  Members  of  the  University,  but  which  are  in 
no  way  sanctioned  by  the  University  itself; 

"  Resolved,  That  modes  of  interpretadon  such  as  are  suggested 
in  the  said  Tract,  evading  rather  than  explaining  the  sense  of  the 
Thirty-Nine  Articles,  and  reconciling  subscription  to  them  with  the 
adoption  of  errors  which  they  were  designed  to  counteract,  defeat 
the  object,  and  are  inconsistent  with  the  due  observance  of  the 
above-mentioned  Statutes. 

•'  P.  Wynter,   Vice-Chancellor." 


156  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Now  with  regard  to  the  above  resolution  of  the 
Hebdomadal  Board  there  is  an  interesting  statement  by 
Mr.  Griffiths,  one  of  the  four  Tutors,  in  a  privately 
printed  letter,  which  has  not  hitherto  been  published, 
and  which  I  may  cite  here.  He  writes  on  April  5,  1841, 
to  a  friend  : — 

"Now  the  facts  are  these.  On  Friday,  March  12,  the  Board 
resolved  that  they  ought  to  censure  the  Tract  in  some  public  and 
official  way ;  and  this  resolution  was  carried  by  nineteen  against 
two.  The  two  were  .  .  .  One  of  these  two  said,  that  there  were 
certain  parts  of  the  Tract  upon  which  he  did  not  feel  competent  to 
pass  an  opinion,  and  therefore  he  voted  against  the  censure.  The 
other  said,  that  probably  no  person  present  could  feel  more  strongly 
than  he  did  the  mischievous  tendency  of  this  particular  Tract,  but 
he  thought  the  Tracts  as  a  whole  had  done  good,  and  he  judged  the 
censure  inexpedient.  Every  other  person  who  spoke  condemned 
the  Tract  vciO^X.  strongly.  No  one,  however,  spoke  as  if  he  was  moved 
to  condemn  it  in  consequence  of  our  Letter  [i.e.  of  the  four  Tutors]. 

"  But  there  were  only  twenty-one  persons  then  present  out  of 
the  twenty-six.  Three  were  absent  from  infirmity  or  illness,  and 
two  by  accident.  Of  the  three,  one  is  known  to  have  expressed  his 
opinion  that  the  proceedings  taken  against  the  Tract  were  inex- 
pedient, but  I  also  know  that  he  has  expressed  his  opinion  that  the 
Tract  itself  was  likely  to  be  mischievous :  the  other  two  would 
certainly  have  been  in  the  majority.  Of  the  two  who  were  absent 
by  accident,  one  afterwards  voted  against  the  proceedings  of  the 
Board,  alleging  as  his  reason,  that  he  should  be  as  much  ashamed  of 
formally  disavowing  his  concurrence  with  the  principles  of  interpre- 
tation suggested  in  the  Tract  as  of  formally  disavowing  his  disagree- 
ment with  any  person  who  might  chance  to  deny  that  two  and  two 
make  four :  the  other  afterwards  took  occasion  to  express  his  deep 
sense  of  the  dangerous  tendency  of  the  Tract,  and  his  regret  that 
from  not  knowing  the  course  of  the  business  of  the  Board  he  had 
not  been  present  to  give  his  vote  on  Friday. 

"On  that  Friday  a  Committee  was  appointed  to  shape  the 
censure,  and  they  reported  to  the  Board  on  Monday  the  15th. 
Several  questions  then  arose  upon  details,  and  divisions  were  had 
with  various  majorities.  The  first  was  about  an  adjournment,  for 
Mr.  Newman  had  informed  the  Provost  of  Oriel  that  the  author  of 
the  Tract,  still  not  named,  would  publish  an  explanation  of  it  in  two 
or  three  days.  The  minority  on  this  consisted  of  either  three  or 
four  ;  but  even  he  who  on  Friday  opposed  the  measure  as  inexpedient, 
maintained  that  the  Board  ought  to  do  whatever  it  did  at  once.     On 


NEWMAN'S    LETTER    TO    JELF  1 57 

the  subsequent  questions,  which  related  chiefly  or  entirely  to  the 
wording  of  their  resolution,  I  believe  that  both  the  members,  who 
formed  the  minority  on  Friday,  declined  to  vote.  No  other  division 
touched  the  main  question. 

"All  this  I  state   confidently  on   the   direct   authority   of  ear 
witnesses."^ 

On  the  same  day  that  the  resokition  of  the  Heads  of 
Houses  was  made  public,  Newman  wrote  to  the  Vice- 
Chancellor,  acknowledging  himself  the  author  of  the  cen- 
sured Tract,  and  stating  that  he  had  not  given  his  "  name 
hitherto,  under  the  belief  that  it  was  desired  that  I  should 
not,"  and  that  his  opinion  remained  "  unchanged  of  the 
truth  and  honesty  of  the  principle  maintained  in  the  Tract, 
and  of  the  necessity  of  putting  it  forth."  On  the  same 
evening  Newman's  promised  explanation  was  published, 
but  without  his  name.  The  title-page  stated  that  it  was 
"  By  the  Author  "  of  the  Tract,  and  at  the  end  he  placed 
his  initials.  In  this  pamphlet  Newman  declares  that  he 
does  consider  that  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles  "contain  a 
condemnation  of  the  authoritative  teaching  of  the  Church  of 
Rome  "  on  Purgatory,  Pardons,  Worshipping,  and  Adora- 
tion of  Images  and  Relics,  the  Invocation  of  Saints,  and 
the  Mass  ;  ^  but  he  is  careful  to  explain  what  he  means 
by  the  expression  "  authoritative  teaching."  "  I  conceive," 
he  writes,  '<  that  what  '  all  the  best  writers  '  say  is  authori- 
tative teaching,  and  a  sufficient  object  for  the  censures  con- 
veyed in  the  Articles,  though  the  decrees  of  Trent,  taken 
by  themselves,  remain  untouched."  ^  Even  in  this  ex- 
planation, therefore,  he  admits  that  he  had  not  anything 
to  say  against  what  had  been  defined  officially  by  the 
Church  of  Rome,  but  only  against  what  some  of  her 
writers  had  taught.  He  knew  very  well  that  Rome  is  not 
bound  by  what  her  "  best  writers  "  teach,  and  that  she  is 
free  to  reject  their  teaching  whenever  she  likes.  He 
admits  that  any  one  who  believed  that  the  Church  of 
Rome  is  infallible  ought  to  join  her  ;  but  he  is  careful  to 

1  Two  Letters  Concerning  No.  90  in  the  Series  called  the  Tracts  for  the  Times. 
Printed,  for  Private  Distribution  Only,  by  W.  Baxter,  Oxford,  1841,  pp.  13-15. 

2  A  Letter  to  the  Rev.  R.  W.Jelf,  D.D.,  In  Explanation  of  No.  90.     By  the 
Author,  2nd  edition,  p.  4.  ^  Ibid.  p.  10. 


158  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

assure  his  readers  :  "  I  am  not  aware  that  this  doctrine  is 
anywhere  embodied  in  her  formal  decrees."  He  has 
strong  things  to  say  against  this  teaching  of  the  "  best 
divines."  "  As  to  the  present  authoritative  teaching  of 
the  Church  of  Rome,"  he  writes,  ^Ho  judge  by  what  we  see  of 
it  in  public,  I  think  it  goes  very  far  indeed  to  substitute 
another  Gospel  for  the  true  one.  Instead  of  setting  before 
the  soul  the  Holy  Trinity,  and  Heaven  and  Hell ;  it  does 
seem  to  me,  as  a  popular  system,  to  preach  the  Blessed 
Virgin  and  the  Saints,  and  Purgatory.  If  ever  there  was 
a  system  which  required  reformation,  it  is  that  of  Rome  at 
this  day,  or  in  other  words  (as  I  should  call  it)  Romanism 
or  Popery."  ^  As  to  what  the  Council  of  Trent  teaches 
concerning  the  Veneration  of  Images,  he  sees  nothing  to 
object  against  ;  but  he  declares  that  it  is  better  than  the 
popular  system  of  Rome  in  actual  operation  :  — "  The 
Divines  at  Trent,"  he  writes,  "  say  that  '  to  images  are  to 
be  paid  due  honour  and  veneration  ; '  and  to  those  who 
honour  the  sacred  volume,  pictures  of  friends,  and  the 
like,  as  we  all  do,  /  do  not  see  that  these  very  words  of  them- 
selves can  be  the  subject  of  objection.  Far  otherwise  when  we 
see  the  comment  which  the  Church  of  Rome  has  put  on 
them  in  teaching  and  practice.  I  consider  its  existing 
creed  and  popular  worship  to  be  as  near  idolatry  as  any 
portion  of  that  Church  can  be."^  Bad  as  all  he  objects  to 
is,  Newman  tries  to  save  the  character  of  the  Church  of 
Rome  at  the  expense  of  her  children,  for  as  to  the  prac- 
tical abuses  condemned  in  Tract  XC.  he  points  out  that 
Romanists  have  protested  against  them  as  much  as  he 
had: — "At  the  Council  of  Trent  such  protests,"  he  writes, 
"  as  are  quoted  in  the  Tract,  were  entered  against  so  many 
of  the  very  errors  and  corruptions  which  our  Articles  and 
Homilies  also  condemn."  ^  He  assures  Dr.  Jelf  that  this, 
his  explanation,  is  not  to  be  taken  as  withdrawing  any 
opinion  he  had  expressed  in  Tract  XC.  On  the  contrary, 
he  tells  him  : — "  Nor  can  I  repent  of  what  I  have  pub- 
lished." *      "  Nor  is  this  Letter  a  retractation."  ^ 

^  A  Letter  to  the  Rev.  R.  W.Jelf,  D.D.,  In  Explanation  of  No.  90,  p.  5. 
''■  Ibid.  pp.  6,  7.  3  ji)i^^  p.  15.  *  Ibid.  p.  27.  ^  Ibid.  p.  29. 


Wiseman's  sympathy  with  the  tractarians      159 

All  through  this  pamphlet  it  seems  to  me  that  New- 
man is  in  reality  censuring  the  Romanists  for  not  being 
as  good  as  their  Church,  while  he  holds  that  Church  re- 
sponsible for  their  misconduct.  He  threatens  that  if  he 
and  his  friends  are  not  allowed  to  have  their  own  way, 
there  will  be  a  "  risk  of  a  schism  "  ;  ^  and  he  holds  up  the 
Church  of  Rome  to  the  admiration  of  English  Churchmen 
as  having  many  spiritual  blessings  of  which,  in  the  Church 
of  England,  they  were  deprived. 

"The  age,"  he  writes,  "is  moving  towards  something,  and  most 
unhappily  the  one  religious  communion  among  us  which  has  of  late 
years  been  practically  in  possession  of  this  something,  is  the  Church 
of  Rome.  She  alone,  amid  all  the  errors  and  evils  of  her  practical 
system,  has  given  free  scope  to  the  feelings  of  awe,  mystery,  tender- 
ness, reverence,  devotedness,  and  other  feelings  which  may  specially 
be  called  Catholic.  The  question  then  is,  whether  we  shall  give 
them  up  to  the  Roman  Church  or  claim  them  for  ourselves.  .  .  . 
But  if  we  do  give  them  up,  then  we  must  give  up  the  men  who 
cherish  them.  We  must  consent  either  to  give  up  the  men,  or  to 
admit  their  principles."  ^ 

In  this  way  Newman  glorified  the  Church  of  Rome, 
and  tried  to  frighten  the  Church  of  England  into  admitting 
the  principles  of  the  Tractarians,  under  the  threat  that  if 
they  were  not  tolerated  the  men  who  held  them  would  go  to 
Rome.  Not  that  Rome  was,  just  at  that  time,  over  anxious 
to  hurry  them  over  the  border.  It  suited  her  schemes  that 
they  should  for  a  time  remain  in  the  Church  of  England. 
Cardinal  Wiseman's  biographer  very  frankly  admits  that : — 
"  Wiseman's  attitude,  however,  as  a  whole,  was  deeply 
sympathetic  towards  the  spirit  and  intentions  of  the 
Tractarians.  ...  He  acquiesced  in  the  view  that  while 
Newman  was  satisfied  with  remaining  in  the  English 
Church  in  the  hope  of  ultimately  bringing  many  to  unity, 
he  might  do  so  without  being  urged  to  cut  short  his  time  of  waiting!'  ^ 
This  poHcy  had  been  adopted  before  Tract XC.yN2iS  published. 
Of  the  previous  year  Mr.  Wilfred  Ward  writes : — "Corporate 
Reunion  with  Rome  was  more  and  more  explicitly  spoken 

*  A  Letter  to  the  Rev.  R.  W.Jelf,  D.D.,  In  Explanation  of  No.  90,  p.  27. 

^  Ibid.  pp.  25,  26.  '  Life  and  Times  of  Cardinal  Wiseman,  vol.  i.  p.  381. 


l6o  HISTORY   OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

of  by  them  [advanced  Tractarians]  as  a  practicable  pros- 
pect, though  its  nature  and  extent  were  somewhat  un- 
defined. The  pressing  of  individual  conversions  was  deprecated, 
even  by  the  most  advanced  of  the  party,  as  likely  to  prevent 
the  realisation  of  any  such  hope.  The  Corporate  Movement 
contemplated  soon  became  limited,  however,  to  a  large 
accession  of  Tractarians  to  Rome.  The  events  of  1841 
negatived  the  idea  of  any  action  on  the  part  of  the  National 
Church  ;  and  Newman,  Ward,  and  Oakeley  very  soon  came 
to  see  that  what  was  spoken  of  as  '  Reunion  '  must  amount 
to  nothing  less  than  submission  to  Rome."  ^ 

To  the  Roman  Catholics  on  the  Continent  these  subtle 
plans  of  the  Tractarians  were  made  known  by  a  letter, 
written  soon  after  the  publication  of  Tract  XC,  to  the 
Editor  of  the  Paris  Univers,  in  which  it  appeared  on  April 
13th.  The  letter  was  written  by  the  Rev.  W.  G.  Ward, 
and  was  translated  into  French  by  Mr  J.  D.  Dalgairns, 
of  Exeter  College,  Oxford.     Mr.  Ward  wrote  : — 

"The  charity  which  you  have  always  shown  towards  the  Anglican 
Church  makes  me  think  you  will  not  refuse  to  find  room  in  your 
Catholic  journal  lor  the  letter  of  one  of  the  children  of  that  afflicted 
Church  which  has  drunk  to  the  dregs  the  bitter  cup  which  is  now 
the  lot  of  all  the  Churches  of  Christ.  The  eyes  of  all  Christendom 
are  at  this  moment  turned  to  England,  so  long  separated  from  the 
rest  of  Catholic  Europe ;  everywhere  a  presentiment  has  gone  forth 
that  the  hour  of  her  reunion  is  at  hand,  and  that  this  island,  of  old 
so  fruitful  in  saints,  is  once  more  about  to  put  forth  new  fruits  worthy 
of  the  martyrs  who  have  watered  it  with  their  blood.  And,  truly, 
this  presentiment  is  not  ungrounded,  as  I  shall  prove  to  you  by  a 
detail  of  what  is  now  passing  in  the  University  of  Oxford.  This 
detail  is  the  more  important,  inasmuch  as  the  University  is  indeed 
the  heart  of  the  Anglican  Church,  the  beatings  of  which  make  the 
remotest  members  of  this  great  body  quiver.  The  only  end  I  pro- 
pose to  myself  is  to  give  you  a  just  idea  of  the  present  position  of 
the  Anglican  Church,  so  that  the  French  Catholics  may  share  the 
emotions  of  our  souls.  And  I  do  not  believe  that  it  is  possible  to 
give  you  an  idea  of  them  otherwise  than  by  an  exposition  of  a  small 
treatise  which  has  lately  appeared.  I  do  not  flatter  myself  that  you 
will  approve  of  all  the  opinions  which  I  am  about  to  mention.  I  do 
not  defend  them.     I  am  their  historian — not  their  author. 

^  Life  and  Times  of  Cardinal  Wiseman,  vo\,  i.  pp.  371,  372. 


ward's  traitorous  letter  i6i 

"  Mr.  Newman,  one  of  our  theologians,  published,  a  few  days 
since,  the  ninetieth  number  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  in  which  he 
designs  to  demonstrate  that  the  Church  of  Rome  has  fallen  into  no 
formal  error  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  that  the  Invocations  of  the 
Saints  (the  Ora  pro  nobis,  for  example),  Purgatory,  and  the  Supre- 
macy of  the  Holy  See  of  Rome,  are  in  no  way  contrary  to  the  Catholic 
traditions,  or  even  to  our  authorised  formularies ;  in  fine,  that  the 
dogma  of  Transubstantiation  should  be  no  obstacle  to  the  union  of 
the  Churches,  as  in  this  article  there  is  only  a  verbal  difference 
between  them.  At  the  same  time  he  is  but  little  satisfied  with  our 
Thirty-Nine  Articles,  although  he  maintains  throughout  that  the  pro- 
vidence of  God  hindered  the  Reformers  from  openly  inserting  in 
them  the  Protestant  dogmas  to  which  they  were  but  too  much 
attached.  You  will  perceive,  sir,  all  the  importance  of  those 
opinions,  and  the  more  so  as  they  are  not  the  opinions  of  an  isolated 
theologian.  I  can  assure  you,  that  at  the  same  time  that  an  opposi- 
tion was  raised  by  the  elder  members  of  the  University  (as  might  be 
expected,  seeing  that  they  lived  under  the  system  of  the  eighteenth 
century),  that  very  opposition  gave  me  an  opportunity  of  observing 
that  even  the  most  moderate  of  the  Catholic  party  at  Oxford  were 
ready  to  sustain  the  author  of  the  Tract. 

"  You  see  then,  sir,  that  humility,  the  first  condition  of  every 
sound  reform,  is  not  wanting  in  us.  We.  are  little  satisfied  with  our 
positioti.  We  groan  at  the  sins  committed  by  our  ancestors  in 
separating  from  the  Catholic  world.  We  experience  a  burning  desire 
to  be  reunited  to  our  brethren.  We  love  with  an  unfeigned  affection 
the  Apostolic  See,  which  we  acknozvledge  to  be  the  head  of  Christendom, 
and  the  more  because  the  Church  of  Rome  is  our  mother,  which 
sent  from  her  bosom  the  blessed  St.  Augustine  to  bring  us  her  immov- 
able faith.  We  admit  also  that  it  is  not  our  formularies,  nor  even 
the  Council  of  Trent,  which  prevent  our  union.  After  all  these 
concessions,  you  may  ask  me,  Why,  then,  do  you  not  rejoin  us  ?  What 
is  it  that  prevents  you?  Is  it  your  formularies?  But,  according  to 
yourself,  you  do  not  look  upon  them  with  a  very  favourable  eye.  Is 
it  ours  ? — But,  in  your  opinion,  they  do  not  contain  any  error.  My 
reply  to  this  question  will  develop  to  you  still  more  clearly  our 
present  position.  In  the  first  place,  while  Mr.  Newman  expresses 
himself  thus  clearly  on  the  purity  of  the  formularies  authorised  by 
the  Church  of  Rome,  he  always  makes  a  distinction  between  the 
system  of  the  Council  of  Trent  and  another  system  which  exists  in 
that  Church.  While  he  returns  thanks  to  God  for  having  preserved 
that  Council  from  all  formal  error  in  matters  of  faith,  he,  at  the  same 
time,  maintains  that  in  practice  there  are  corruptions  in  the  Church 

L 


1 62  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

against  which  the  Council  itself  raises  its  voice,  but  which  neverthe- 
less still  exist,  and  call  loudly  for  reform.  Thus  he  says  that  '  not- 
withstanding the  errors  in  practical  system,  there  is  no  Church  but 
that  of  Rome  which  has  given  a  free  course  to  the  emotions  of 
adoration,  of  mystery,  of  tenderness,  of  reverence,  devotion,  and  to 
the  other  sentiments  of  that  kind,  which  may  so  entirely  be  called 
Catholic'  He  maintains  that  the  theory  of  the  Church  is  pure  ; 
but  that,  according  to  certain  books  of  piety  which  are  too  widely 
spread,  according  to  the  statements  of  enlightened  travellers,  free 
from  all  the  prejudices  of  vulgar  Protestantism,  he  fears  that  there  is 
a  system  authorised  which,  practically,  '  instead  of  presenting  to  the 
soul  of  the  sinner  the  Holy  Trinity,  Heaven,  and  Hell,  substitutes 
for  that  the  Holy  Virgin,  the  Saints,  and  Purgatory.'  It  is  true  that 
all  that  does  not  form  an  essential  part  of  the  faith  of  the  Church, 
but  he  avows  that  the  system  loudly  calls  for  reform,  and  that  it 
would  be  impossible  for  the  Anglican  Church  yet  to  cast  itself  into 
the  arms  of  that  of  Rome. 

"  In  the  second  place,  we  have  a  sacred  duty  to  discharge  towards 
the  members  of  our  Church.  We  cannot  yet  bring  ourselves  to 
believe  that  our  dear  England  is  in  the  same  position  as  the  heretics 
who  boast  in  the  names  of  Luther  and  Calvin.  Of  a  truth,  sir,  is  not 
the  Episcopal  order  still  worth  something  ?  A  sacrilegious  king  may 
indeed  have  stolen  from  the  altars  of  Canterbury  the  sacred  bones  of 
St.  Thomas,  but,  think  you  he  had  the  power  to  drive  away  the 
great  soul  who,  from  his  throne  in  the  skies,  ever  watches  over  the 
See  which  he  has  illustrated  by  his  life,  and  consecrated  by  his  blood  ? 
God  forbid  that  the  august  line  of  Lanfranc  and  of  Anselm  should 
ever  cease.  If  we  have  not  preserved  it,  it  is  no  more  ;  for,  of  a 
truth,  you  will  not  say  that  its  succession  has  been  kept  up  by  you. 
There  is  no  Archbishop  in  partibus  of  Canterbury  or  York,  as  there 
is  of  Cambysopolis  or  of  Siga.  But  perhaps  you  may  say  that  the 
moment  an  Archbishop  ceases  to  be  in  communion  with  Rome,  he 
also  ceases  to  exist.  But  permit  me  here  to  become  a  little  scholastic, 
and  to  borrow  the  terms  with  which  the  schools  supply  me,  in  order 
to  give  precision  to  my  ideas. 

"  The  Papacy,  according  to  us,  is  rather  the  accidental  than  the 
essential  form  of  the  Church.  It  resembles  rather  the  vital  heat  than 
the  life  of  the  Church.  The  absence  of  heat  is  a  mark  of  sickness. 
Without  it  the  limbs,  powerless,  are  dragged  sorrowfully  about,  and 
the  functions  of  life  languish  ;  but  life  may  still  be  there.  Thus, 
union  with  the  Pope  is  a  necessary  result  of  the  perfect  health  of  the 
Church.  The  retrenching  of  this  union  is  a  proof  that  all  does  not 
go  well.     It  is  a  symptom  of  the  presence  of  a  malady  which  gnaws 


ward's  traitorous  letter  163 

the  entrails  of  the  Church.  Her  priesthood  is,  perhaps,  deprived  of 
some  of  its  functions,  or,  as,  alas  !  is  too  certainly  the  case  with  us,  the 
episcopacy  is  subject  to  the  powers  of  this  world.  But  life — that  is 
to  say,  the  essence — of  the  Church  is  not  yet  extinct.  We  have, 
then,  still  a  duty  to  perform  towards  our  brethren. 

"  There  are  at  this  moment  in  the  Anglican  Church  a  crowd  of 
persons  who  balance  between  Protestantism  and  Catholicism,  and 
who,  nevertheless,  would  reject  with  horror  the  idea  of  a  union  with 
Rome.  The  Protestant  prejudices,  which  for  three  hundred  years 
have  infected  our  Church,  are  unhappily  too  deeply  rooted  there  to 
be  extirpated  without  a  great  deal  of  address.  We  must  then  offer  in 
sacrifice  to  God  this  ardent  desire  which  devours  us  of  seeing  once 
more  the  perfect  unity  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  We  must  still  bear 
the  terrible  void  which  the  isolation  of  our  Church  creates  in  our 
hearts,  and  remain  still  till  it  pleases  God  to  convert  the  hearts  of 
our  Anglican  confreres,  especially  of  our  holy  fathers  the  Bishops. 
We  are  destined,  I  am  persuaded,  to  bring  back  many  wandering 
sheep  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth.  In  fact,  the  progress  of 
Catholic  opinions  in  England  for  the  last  seven  years  is  so  inconceiv- 
able, that  no  hope  should  appear  extravagant.  Let  tts,  then,  remain 
quiet  for  some  years,  till,  by  God's  blessing,  the  ears  of  Englishmen  are 
accustomed  to  hear  the  name  of  Rome  pronounced  tvith  reverence.  At 
the  end  of  this  term  you  will  soon  see  the  fruits  of  our  patience. 

"  But,  moreover,  I  venture  to  say,  that  we  have  besides  a  sacred 
duty  to  fulfil  towards  Rome.  Far  from  us  be  that  vulgar  Protes- 
tantism which  dares  to  open  its  profane  mouth,  and  utter  its  calum- 
nies against  the  See  of  St  Peter.  Yes,  if  I  could  once  be  convinced 
that  the  Spirit  of  God  had  quitted  the  Church  of  Rome,  I  should 
think  at  the  same  time  that  Christianity  was  about  to  be  extinguished 
all  over  the  world.  .  .  . 

"  And  this  great  heart  [of  England]  once  so  Catholic,  this 
poor  heart,  so  long  torn  by  the  vigour  of  its  own  life,  exhausted 
in  vain  efforts  to  fill  up  the  frightful  void  which  reigns  there,  does 
it  not  merit  some  sacrifices  on  your  part,  that  it  may  find  consolation 
and  healing?  Oh,  how  sweet  it  was  to  hear  that  our  Catholic 
brethren  prayed  for  us.  The  triumphant  army  in  heaven  prays 
also  for  us.  It  has  prayed,  I  am  sure,  from  the  beginning  of 
these  three  centuries  of  schism  and  heresy.  Why  have  not  the  prayers 
of  St.  Gregory,  St.  Augustine,  and  St.  Thomas  been  heard  ?  Be- 
cause of  our  sins ;  the  sins  not  only  of  England,  but  of  Rome.  Let 
us  go  and  do  penance  together  and  we  shall  be  heard.  During  this 
holy  time,  in  which  the  Church  retires  to  the  depths  of  the  solitude 
of  her  soul,  following  the  bleeding  feet  of  her  Divine  Master,  driven  by 


164  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

the  Spirit  into  the  desert,  know  that  many  of  us  stretch  out  our  hands 
day  and  night  before  the  Lord,  and  beg  of  Him,  with  sighs  and 
groans,  to  reunite  them  to  our  CathoUc  brethren.  Frenchmen  !  fail 
not  to  aid  us  in  this  holy  exercise  ;  and  I  am  persuaded  that  many 
Lents  will  not  have  passed  before  we  shall  chaunt  together  our 
Paschal  hymns,  in  those  sublime  accents  which  have  been  used  by 
the  Divine  Spouse  of  Christ  for  so  many  ages."  ^ 

Roman  Catholics  as  well  as  Protestants  and  Tract- 
arians  entered  zealously  into  the  controversy  started  by 
Tract  XC.  Of  course  it  gave  them  intense  joy  to  witness 
Newman's  gradual  advance  Romeward,  while  they  held  in 
contempt  the  logic  by  which  he  maintained  his  position 
in  the  Church  of  England.  One  who  signed  himself  "  An 
English  Catholic"  wrote  to  Newman  a  stinging  letter,  in 
which  he  said  : — "  That  you  should  deem  it  consistent 
with  your  station  in  the  Church  of  England  to  sanction 
by  your  writings  a  belief  in  some  of  the  most  unpopular 
doctrines  of  the  Catholic  Church  is,  no  doubt,  a  subject 
of  some  surprise  to  the  members  of  our  [Roman  Catholic] 
communion.  But  however  we  might  wonder,  wcy  at  least, 
should  have  no  right  to  reproach  you  ;  nor  could  your 
equivocal  position  afford  us  any  ground  of  complaint,  had 
the  question  rested  here.  But,  sir,  we  have  a  right  to  com- 
plain, and  we  do  complain,  that  in  order  to  screen  yourself 
in  the  adoption  of  our  tenets  from  the  obloquy  and  ruin  that 
your  profession  of  them,  as  ours,  would  undoubtedly  entail 
upon  you,  you  deliberately  distort  and  misrepresent  our  faith 
and  practice — that  in  order  to  avert  the  impending  storm 
of  Protestant  ire  from  your  own  devoted  head,  you  erect 
a  counterfeit  image  of  *  Romanism '  to  serve  as  an  eccle- 
siastical lightning  conductor."  ^  As  to  Newman's  attempt, 
in  Tract  XC,  to  reconcile  the  Council  of  Trent  with  the 
Thirty-Nine  Articles,  this  Roman  Catholic  writer  forcibly 
remarks  : — "  If  you  can  only  establish  the  fact  that  the 
acceptance  of  the  Decrees  of  Trent  is  consistent  with  a 
belief  in  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles,  there  is  not  a  Roman 

^   Catholic  Magazine,  vol.  for  1841,  pp.  310-313. 

'  Oxford  or  Rome?    A  Letter  to  the  Rev.  J.  H.  Newman  on  No.  90.     By 
An  English  Catholic,  p.  3. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    OPINION    OF    TRACT    XC.  1 65 

Catholic  in  England,  Ireland,  or  Scotland,  from  his  Grace 
of  Norfolk  down  to  your  humble  correspondent,  who 
may  not  subscribe  these  Articles  with  a  safe  and  easy 
conscience  ! "  ^ 

Dr.  Wiseman  could  not  remain  an  idle  spectator  of 
the  controversy  in  which  he  took  the  deepest  interest. 
Directly  after  Newman  had  published  his  Letter  to  Dr.  J  elf ^ 
Wiseman  wrote  to  him  about  it,  and  published  his  letter 
as  a  pamphlet.  He  distinctly  repudiated  the  theory 
Newman  had  put  forth.  "The  existence,"  wrote  Wise- 
man, "  of  any  such  authoritative  teaching  at  variance  with 
the  doctrines  of  the  Tridentine  Synod  is,  to  me,  a  novel 
idea  ;  and  I  think  it  will  prove  so  to  all  Catholics."  ^  But 
though  he  criticised,  Wiseman  had  a  great  deal  more  to 
be  thankful  for  than  to  find  fault  with,  and  therefore,  at 
the  end  of  his  letter,  he  expresses  his  gratitude  to  Newman 
in  the  warmest  terms.  "  In  conclusion,"  he  wrote,  "  I 
thank  you.  Rev.  Sir,  from  my  heart,  for  the  welcome  in- 
formation which  your  letter  contains,  that  men,  whom 
you  so  highly  value,  should  be  opening  their  eyes  to  the 
beauties  and  perfections  of  our  Church,  and  require  such 
efforts,  as  your  interpretation  of  the  Articles,  to  keep  them 
from  '  straggling  in  the  direction  of  Rome.'  "  ^ 

Yet  one  more  Roman  Catholic  pamphlet  on  Tract  XC. 
I  must  quote  before  I  pass  on.  It  was  written  by  a 
gentleman  who,  as  we  shall  see  more  fully  presently,  gave 
the  chief  energies  of  his  life,  from  1841  until  his  death,  to 
help  on  the  Oxford  Movement,  because  he  saw  clearly 
that  the  fruits  of  that  Movement  would  be  reaped  by  the 
Church  of  Rome.  I  refer  to  Mr.  Ambrose  Lisle  Phillipps, 
who  afterwards  adopted  the  name  of  Ambrose  Phillipps 
de  Lisle.  Tract  XC.  filled  his  heart  with  joy  and  glad- 
ness : — 

"It  is  impossible,"  he  wrote,  "to  do  sufficient  justice  to  the 
firmness  and  courage  which  Mr.  Newman  has  evinced  in  acknow- 

^  Oxford  or  Rome  ?  p.  5. 

*  A  Letter  to  the  Rev.  J.  H.  Newman  On  Some  Passages  in  his  Letter  to  the 
Rev.  Dr.Jelf.     By  N.  Wiseman,  p.  5. 
^  Ibid.  p.  31. 


1 66  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

ledging  the  authorship  of  Tract  No.  90.  I  rejoice  also  to  see  that, 
in  his  subsequent  Letter  to  Dr.  Jelf^  he  persists  in  his  noble  declara- 
tion in  favour  of  so  many  Catholic  truths,  no  less  than  in  his 
generous  attempt  to  soften  down  the  differences  between  the  Church 
of  England  and  the  Catholic  Church,  which  to  me  at  least  appears 
a  most  important  step  towards  the  reunion  and  the  peace  of  dis- 
tracted Christendom.  Above  all  I  hail,  with  inexpressible  joy,  and 
the  deepest  gratitude  towards  Him  who  holds  in  His  hands  the 
hearts  of  men,  and  who  for  the  love  of  mankind  turns  every  event 
to  the  good  of  His  Church,  the  glorious  admissions  which,  both  in 
the  Tract  and  the  Letter,  are  so  fearlessly  proclaimed  in  behalf  of 
that  holy  Council  of  Trent,  against  which  for  three  centuries  such 
absurd  and  irrational  prejudices  had  taken  root  in  the  minds  of  our 
separated  brethren."^ 

But  while  Newman  and  his  friends  were,  on  the 
whole,  pleased  with  Tract  XC,  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  was 
placed  by  it  in  a  very  uncomfortable  position.  With  the 
general  principles  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times  he  agreed,  but 
this  latest  of  the  series  seemed  to  him  to  go  too  far  for 
him  to  follow.  His  first  step  seems  to  have  been  that  of 
opening  a  private  correspondence  with  Pusey,  Newman, 
and  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  on  the  subject.  To 
Pusey,  on  March  17th,  the  Bishop  wrote  : — "  I  feel  safe  in 
declaring  to  you  more  fully  the  fears  which  I  entertain  as 
to  the  possible  consequences  of  the  recent  publication  ; 
and  you  will  understand  me  when  I  say  that  I  look  with 
anxiety  to  its  effects,  not  only  within  the  limits  of  my 
diocese,  but  throughout  the  Church  of  which  I  am  a 
Bishop,  and  in  the  purity  and  tranquillity  of  which  I  am 
deeply  interested.  ...  If  he  [Newman]  could  also  adopt 
respectful  language  (and  the  more  cordial  the  better)  in 
speaking  of  the  formularies  of  the  Church,  he  would  do 
much  to  relieve  the  minds  of  many  (myself  among  others) 
who,  with  a  sincere  reverence  and  desire  for  Catholic 
truth,  have  an  unfeigned  attachment  to  the  principles  of 
the  Church  of  England."  ^  To  Newman  himself  the 
Bishop  wrote  on  the  same  day  : — "  I  do  feel  it  my  duty 

^  Some  Remarks  oti  a  Letter  to  Dr.  Jelf.     By  Ambrose  Lisle  Phillipps,  Esq., 
p.  4. 

*  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  184. 


NEWMAN'S    LETTER    TO    THE    BISHOP    OF    OXFORD       1 67 

to  express  my  regret  at  its  publication,  and  to  state  to 
you  plainly,  though  generally,  my  honest  conviction  of 
its  containing  much  which  I  am  sure  is  directly  the 
reverse  of  what  the  writer  would  wish  or  expect  from  it, 
but  what  would,  in  my  opinion,  tend  both  to  disunite  and 
endanger  the  Church."  ^  The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
expressed  the  opinion  that  there  were  passages  in  Tract 
XC.  which  were  "very  objectionable,"  and  that  it  seemed 
to  him  "  most  desirable  that  the  publication  of  the  Tracts 
should  be  discontinued  for  ever."  ^  The  Bishop  of  Oxford 
agreed  with  the  desire  of  the  Archbishop  for  the  suppression 
of  the  Tracts,  and  suggested  that  Newman  should  write 
and  publish  a  letter  of  explanation  to  his  Diocesan.  New- 
man consented  to  both  requests.  The  result  of  the  dis- 
continuance of  the  Tracts  was,  in  the  opinion  of  Canon 
Liddon,  not  altogether  satisfactory  to  High  Churchmen. 
"  Looked  at  from  a  distance,"  he  remarks,  "  and  taken 
together,  the  censure  of  the  Heads  of  Houses  and  the 
discontinuance  of  the  Tracts  at  the  request  of  the  Bishop, 
produced  a  widespread  feeling  of  discouragement  among 
High  Churchmen."  ^  Newman's  Letter  to  the  Bishop  is 
dated  March  29th,  and  filled  a  pamphlet  of  forty-seven 
pages.  It  could  not  be  termed  satisfactory  to  Protestant 
Churchmen,  and  was  in  no  way  calculated  to  remove 
their  reasonable  objections.  He  expressed  a  sense  of 
"  the  inestimable  privileges "  of  being  a  member  of  that 
Church  over  which  his  lordship  presided ;  that  that 
Church  "  was  a  Divinely  ordained  channel  of  supernatural 
grace  to  the  souls  of  her  members "  ;  and  that  it  was 
"  the  Catholic  Church  in  this  country."  ^  But  on  the 
other  hand,  while  he  had  some  things  to  censure  in  the 
Church  of  Rome,  he  had  words  of  praise  for  her,  and 
expressed  a  desire  for  reunion  with  that  communion. 
Both  criticisms  and  praise  are  found  in  one  paragraph. 

"  They  find,"  he  explained,  "  in  what  I  have  written,  no  abuse, 
at  least  I  trust  not,  of  the  individual  Roman  Catholic,  nor  of  the 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  185.  ^  Ibid.  p.  190.  ^  Ibid.  p.  204. 

*  A  Lette}'  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxfo7-d  On  Occasion  of  No.  90.     By  J.  H.  New- 
man, B.D.,  pp.  33,  34. 


1 68  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Church  of  Rome,  viewed  abstractedly  as  a  Church.  /  cannot  speak 
against  the  Church  of  Roftie,  viewed  in  her  formal  character,  as  a 
true  Church,  since  she  is  '  built  upon  the  foundation  of  the  Apostles 
and  Prophets,  Jesus  Christ  Himself  being  the  Chief  Corner  Stone,' 
Nor  can  I  speak  against  her  private  members,  numbers  of  whom,  I 
trust,  are  God's  people,  in  the  way  to  Heaven,  and  one  with  us  in 
heart,  though  not  in  profession.  But  what  I  have  spoken,  and  do 
strongly  speak  against,  is  that  energetic  system  and  engrossing 
influence  in  the  Church  by  which  it  acts  towards  us,  and  meets  our 
eyes,  like  a  cloud  filling  it,  to  the  eclipse  of  all  that  is  holy,  whether 
in  its  ordinances  or  its  members.  This  system  I  have  called,  in 
what  I  have  written,  Romanism  or  Popery ;  and  by  Romanists  and 
Papists,  I  mean  all  its  members,  as  far  as  they  are  under  the 
power  of  these  principles ;  and  while,  and  so  far  as  this  system 
exists,  and  it  does  exist  now  as  fully  as  heretofore,  /  say  that  we  can 
have  no  peace  tvith  that  Church,  however  we  may  secretly  love  its 
particular  members.  I  cannot  speak  against  its  private  members  ; 
I  should  be  doing  violence  to  every  feeling  of  my  nature  if  I  did, 
and  your  lordship  would  not  require  it  of  me,  I  wish  from  my  heart 
we  and  they  were  one  ;  but  we  cannot,  without  a  sin,  sacrifice  truth 
to  peace ;  and,  in  the  words  of  Archbishop  Laud,  '  till  Rome  be 
other  than  it  is,'  we  must  be  estranged  from  her."  ^ 

Newman  herein  affirmed  that  there  could  be  "  no 
peace  "  with  the  Church  of  Rome,  not  because  of  any  of 
her  actual  doctrines,  but  because  of  "  this  system  "  within 
her ;  but  as  to  the  Church  of  Rome  herself,  apart  from 
"  this  system,"  he  declared : — "  I  wish  from  my  heart  we 
and  they  were  one."  In  proof  of  his  dislike  of  "  this 
system/'  Newman  quoted  several  utterances  of  his  which 
he  had  made  from  time  to  time,  more  especially  in  the 
Tracts  for  the  Times,  and  his  Lectures  on  Romanism  and 
Popular  Protestantism.  The  value  of  these  utterances 
against  the  practical  evils  of  Rome  and  her  system  may 
be  judged  by  the  reasons  he  gave,  less  than  two  years  later, 
for  making  them,  at  the  time  he  withdrew  them  as  "  dirty 
words  of  mine."  ^  "  If,"  wrote  Newman  to  the  Oxford 
Conservative  Journal,  "  you  ask  me  how  an  individual  could 
venture  not  simply  to  hold,  but  to  publish  such  views  of  a 

^  A  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  On  Occasion  of  No.  90,  pp.  20,  21. 
^  Memoirs  of  fames  Hope-Scott,  vol.  ii.  p.  19. 


NEWMAN'S    APOLOGY    FOR    ''DIRTY    WORDS"         1 69 

communion  [Church  of  Rome]  so  ancient,  so  wide-spread- 
ing, so  fruitful  of  saints,  I  answer  that  I  said  to  m^^self,  */ 
ant  not  speaking  my  own  ivords,^  I  am  but  following  almost  a 
consensus  of  the  divines  of  my  Church.  They  have  ever 
used  the  strongest  language  against  Rome,  even  the  most 
able  and  learned  of  them.  I  wish  to  throw  myself  into 
their  system.  While  I  say  what  they  say,  I  am  safe.  Such 
views,  too,  are  necessary  to  our  position.'  Yet  I  have  reason 
to  fear  still  that  such  language  is  to  be  ascribed,  in  no 
small  measure,  to  an  impetuous  temper,  a  hope  of  approv- 
ing myself  to  persons  I  respect,  and  a  wish  to  repel  the  charge 
of  Romanism." "  A  week  or  two  later  Newman  explained 
more  fully  to  his  friend,  Mr.  J.  R.  Hope-Scott,  his  reasons 
for  withdrawing  all  that  he  had  said  against  the  Church  of 
Rome.  Due  allowance  must  be  made  for  any  advance  of 
Newman  in  a  Romeward  direction  between  the  date  when 
he  wrote  his  published  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  on 
March  29,  1841,  and  February  3,  1843,  when  he  wrote 
to  Mr.  Hope-Scott  as  follows  : — 

"My  reason  for  the  thing\\h2Li  is,  for  withdrawing  his  words  against 
Rome]  was  my  long-continued  feeling  of  the  great  inconsistency  I  was 
in  of  letting  things  stand  in  print  against  me  which  I  did  not  hold, 
and  which  I  could  not  but  be  contradicting  by  my  acting  every  day 
of  my  life.  And  more  especially  {i.e.  it  came  home  to  me  most 
vividly  in  that  particular  way)  I  felt  that  I  was  taking  people  in  ;  that 
they  thought  me  what  I  was  not,  and  were  trusting  me  when  they 
should  not,  and  this  has  been  at  times  a  very  painful  feeling  indeed. 
I  don't  want  to  be  trusted  (perhaps  you  may  think  my  fear,  even 
before  this  affair,  somewhat  amusing),  but  so  it  was  and  is ;  people 
won't  believe  I  go  as  far  as  I  do — they  will  cling  to  their  hopes.  And 
then,  again,  intimate  friends  have  alfnost  reproached  nie  with  ^  palteri?ig 
with  them  in  a  double  sense,  keeping  the  word  of  promise  to  their  ear, 
to  break  it  to  their  hope.'  They  have  said  that  my  words  against 
Rome  often,  when  narrowly  examined,  were  only  what  /meant,  but 
that  the  effect  of  them  was  what  others  meant."  ^ 

Though  foes  many  attacked  Tract  XC,  it  must  not  be 
supposed  that  Newman  was  without  friends  to  defend  it 

^  Yet  he  published  them  as  his  own  ivoids  ! 

^  Newman's  Via  Media,  vol.  ii.  pp.  432,  433,  edition  1891. 

*  Memoirs  of  James  Hope-Scott,  vol,  ii.  pp.  20,  21. 


170  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

and  him.  One  of  the  earliest  of  these  to  enter  the  field 
was  the  Rev.  William  George  Ward,  who  himself  was, 
three  years  later,  the  object  of  a  successful  attack  from  the 
Protestant  side.  I  should  imagine  that  Ward's  pamphlet, 
A  Few  Words  in  Support  of  No.  go,  must  have  done  Newman 
more  harm  than  good,  for  it  set  before  the  public  his  real 
views  in  altogether  too  clear  a  light,  Newman's  object  being 
to  cover  his  real  meaning  as  far  as  possible  by  subtle  argu- 
ments. The  Protestant  opposition  to  Tract  XC.  was  cer- 
tainly not  lessened  by  Ward's  explanations,  especially  as 
given  in  his  second  pamphlet,  A  Few  More  Words  in  Support 
of  No.  90.  This  latter  pamphlet  dealt  at  some  length  with 
the  arguments  put  forth  in  an  anonymous  pamphlet, 
entitled.  The  Arlic/es  Construed  by  Themselves,  the  authorship 
of  which  is  now  attributed  by  his  biographer  to  Mr. 
Robert  Lowe,  of  Magdalen  College,  Oxford,  since  widely 
known  as  Lord  Sherbrooke.^  In  his  Few  More  Words  Mr. 
Ward  admitted  that  it  was  "a  most  bitter  thought,  that 
the  principal  advocates  of  what  we  are  well  convinced  is 
God's  holy  truth,  should  be  really  imagined  by  serious  men 
to  advocate  a  Jesuitical  (in  the  popular  sense  of  that  word) 
and  disingenuous  principle,  by  which  any  thing  may  mean 
any  thing,  and  forms  may  be  subscribed  at  the  most 
solemn  period  of  our  life,  only  to  be  dishonestly  explained 
away."  ^  While  criticising  an  article  which  had  appeared 
in  the  Edinburgh  Review,  Ward  remarked : — 

"  2.  If  we  suppose  the  English  Reformation  to  have  severed  us 
from  the  ancient  body  of  the  English  Church,  we  shall  be  bound  in 
consistency  to  leave  our  own  communion  and  join  the  Church  of 
Rome.  The  latter  of  these  alternatives  the  Reviewer  urges  that  we 
are  thus  bound  to  adopt :  on  our  principles,  he  says,  '  the  Church  of 
England  is  the  offspring  of  an  unjustifiable  schism  and  revolution.' 
Alter  the  wording  of  this  a  little,  and  Mr.  Newman,  at  least,  would 
appear  not  unwilling  to  admit  it.  He  intimates,  not  very  obscurely 
{Tract,  p.  79),  that  in  releasing  her  from  the  Roman  Supremacy,  her 
then  governors  were  guilty  of  rebellion  ;  and  considering  that  they 
had  also  sworn  obedience  to  the  Pope,  for  my  own  part  I  see  not 

^  Life  and  Letters  of  Viscount  Sherbrooke.    By  A.  P.  Martin,  vol.  i.  p.  123. 
2  A  Feiv  More  Words.     By  the  Rev.  W.  G.  Ward,  p.  5.     Oxford  :  Parker, 
1841. 


DEFENDERS    OF    TRACT    XC.  171 

how  we  can  avoid  adding,  of  perjury.  The  point  on  which  Mr. 
Newman  would  take  his  stand  is  this ;  that,  estimating  the  sin  at  the 
highest,  it  was  not  '  that  special  sin  which  cuts  ofif  from  the  fountains 
of  grace,  and  is  called  schism.'  .  .  .  Let  him  prove  to  us  that  the 
Church  of  England  is  a  Protestant  community ;  that  it  was  founded 
on  the  denial  of  Catholic  doctrines ;  that  it  seceded  from  the  Ancient 
English  Church  which  witnessed  these  doctrines  ;  let  him  prove  this  ; 
and,  though  the  Articles  were  as  obviously  on  our  side  as  he  con- 
siders them  overwhelmingly  against  us,  our  consciences  could  not 
allow  us  to  remain  one  moment  in  a  communion  which  had  thus 
forfeited  the  gifts  of  grace."  ^ 

Ward  referred  to  "  those  whom  we  revere  as  eminent 
Saints,  the  Popes  and  others  of  the  Middle  Ages  "  ;  ^  but 
clearly  as  he  showed  in  this  pamphlet  his  own  Romish 
sympathies,  and  the  contemptible  position  he  considered 
the  English  Church  to  be  in,  as  compared  with  the  Roman 
Church,  he  did  not  in  it  tell  the  public  all  that  he  thought 
on  the  subject  he  was  discussing.  His  full  views  were 
revealed  to  the  Paris  Roman  Catholic  UniverSf  at  about 
the  same  time,  as  quoted  above  at  pp.  160-164.  ^^^  ^^ 
his  letter  to  that  paper  he  was  careful  not  to  reveal  his 
name.  It  was  not  known  that  he  was  the  writer  of  that 
traitorous  letter  until  after  his  death,  when  the  fact  was 
revealed  in  his  biography.^  Mr.  Robert  Lowe  replied  to 
Ward's  Few  More  Words  by  a  pamphlet  of  twenty-four 
pages,  in  which  he  exposed  the  Jesuitry  of  what  he  termed 
a  "dark  and  thorny  labyrinth." 

The  Rev.  and  Hon.  A.  P.  Percival,  one  of  the  founders 
of  the  Tractarian  Movement,  also  came  to  the  aid  of 
Newman,  in  a  pamphlet  of  thirty-three  pages,  bearing  the 
title  of  A  Vindication  of  the  Principles  of  the  Authors  of  "  The 
Tracts  for  the  Times."  It  was  dated  March  28th.  He  com- 
menced by  giving  a  wholly  inadequate  description  of  the 
principles  held  by  the  writers  of  the  Tracts  (of  whom  he 
was  one),  and  then  asked,  *'  Are  these  principles,  or  are 
they  not,  contrary  to  the  principles  of  the  Reformers,  or 
in  any  respect  forbidden  by  the  Church  of  England  ?  "  * 

^  Ward's  Few  More  Words,  pp.  17,  19.  ^  Ibid.  p.  33. 

^   William  George  Ward  and  the  Oxford  Movement,  p.  187. 
*  A  Vindication,  p.  8. 


172  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

As  explained  economically  by  Mr.  Percival,  I  have  no  doubt 
there  were  at  the  time  many  loyal  Churchmen  who  would 
have  answered  they  were  not  contrary  to  either  the  one  or 
the  other  ;  but  who  would  at  the  same  time  have  indig- 
nantly repudiated  many  of  the  doctrines  taught  in  the 
Tracts  for  the  Times,  and  especially  in  Tract  XC.  "  With  re- 
spect to  the  Tract  XC,"  said  Mr.  Percival,  "  I  must  confess 
that  I  do  not  see  how  any  member  of  the  Church  of 
England  can  be  blamed  for  doing  what  Mr.  Newman  has 
there  attempted  to  do,  namely,  to  give  to  the  Articles 
of  the  Church  of  England  that  interpretation  which  shall 
render  them  most  in  accordance  with  that  principle  of 
deference  to  the  Primitive  Church  of  the  first  seven  centuries."  ^ 
In  this,  Percival  gave  an  inadequate  and  misleading  repre- 
sentation of  Newman's  action.  What  Newman  wished 
was,  not  so  much  to  prove  that  the  Articles  were  not  in 
opposition  to  "  the  first  seven  centuries,"  as  that  they  were 
not  opposed  to  the  official  teaching  of  the  Church  of  Rome 
in  the  nineteenth  century.  Yet  Percival  was  constrained  to 
admit  of  Tract  XC,  that  "There  are  many  things  in  it 
which  I  do  not  understand,  some  which  I  disapprove, 
perhaps  from  not  understanding  them  :  some  statements 
advanced  which  I  think  cannot  be  maintained  :  some 
conclusions  drawn,  which  seem  unwarranted  by  the  pre- 
mises." ^  But  "  as  to  the  main  object  aimed  at  by  the 
Tract,"  he  thought  it  deserved  "  the  commendation  of 
every  member  of  the  Church  of  England."  Yet  he  cannot 
conclude  without  expressing,  in  a  postscript,  against  pro- 
testing the  language  of  Newman  (in  his  Letter  to  Dr.  felf) 
in  praise  of  the  Church  of  Rome. 

Only  five  days  after  Mr.  Percival's  pamphlet  was  issued, 
another  champion  of  Newman's  appeared  in  the  field,  whose 
aid  he  valued  more  than  that  of  all  who  had  gone  before 
him.  This  was  the  Rev.  John  Keble,  who  Newman  always 
considered  as  the  real  founder  of  the  Oxford  Movement. 
In  a  privately  printed  Letter  to  Mr.  fustice  Coleridge,  Keble 
discussed  several  important  cases  of  conscience  relating  to 
subscription  to  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles,  which  are  of  as 

^  A  Vindication,  p.  16.  *  Ibid.  p.  18. 


KEBLE    ON    CATHOLIC    SUBSCRIPTION  1 73 

great  an  interest  to  us  in  the  present  day  as  when  they 
were  first  written,  whatever  view  we  may  take  of  Keble's 
opinions  on  the  subject.  I  must  say  that,  in  this  Letter, 
Keble,  on  the  whole,  advocated  a  course  in  relation  to 
University  and  Episcopal  authority  the  honesty  of  which 
might  well  be  imitated  by  the  Ritualists  of  the  present  day. 
If  Keble's  advice  were  adopted  it  would  lead,  in  Dioceses 
under  Protestant  Bishops,  to  a  wholesale  resignation  of 
livings  by  the  Romanising  clergy.  At  the  same  time  there 
was  in  Keble's  letter  a  defence  of  Trad  XC.  open  to  very 
grave  objection.  He  frankly  admitted,  at  the  outset,  that 
he  was  "  himself  responsible,  as  far  as  any  one  besides 
the  actual  writer  can  be,  for  the  Tract  on  which  so  severe 
a  condemnation  has  lately  been  pronounced  by  the  Heads 
of  Houses  at  Oxford ;  having  seen  it  in  proof,  and  strongly 
recommended  its  publication."  ^  He  even  goes  so  far  as 
to  defend  that  part  of  Tract  XC.  which  was  generally 
considered  one  of  its  most  offensive  portions,  and  which 
the  author  withdrew  in  the  second  edition.  He  thought  it 
quite  right  to  speak  of  the  Church  of  England  as  being 
"  in  bondage,"  working  "  in  chains,"  and  "  teaching  with 
the  stammering  lips  of  ambiguous  formularies "  ;  and  he 
actually  affirmed  that  "  until  English  Churchmen  generally 
sympathise  "  with  Newman  in  such  language,  "  I  see  no 
chance  of  our  Church  assuming  her  true  position  in 
Christendom,  or  of  the  mitigation  of  our  present '  unhappy 
divisions.'"^  "There  appears,"  said  Keble,  "to  be  some 
chance  of  an  authoritative  prohibition  of  the  view  [of  in- 
terpreting the  Articles],  which  not  this  Tract  only,  but  a 
whole  army  of  writers,  new  and  old,  recommend  :  and 
it  becomes  a  serious  question,  what  ought  to  be  the  line 
of  conduct  adopted  in  such  case  by  persons  holding  that 
view,  and  concerned  in  any  way  with  subscription  to  the 
Articles."  ^  This  important  question  Keble  discusses  at 
considerable  length. 

"Suppose,  /.^.,"  he  asks,  "that  not  the  Heads  of  Houses,  but  the 

^  The  Case  of  Catholic  Subscription  to  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles  Considered. 
By  the  Rev.  John  Keble.     "  London  :  1841.     Not  Published,"  p.  6. 
*  Ibid.  p.  10.  2  Ibid.  p.  12. 


174  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Academical  Body  in  Convocation  assembled,  had  determined  that 
interpretations  such  as  have  been  now  (not  for  the  first  time),  sug- 
gested, evade  rather  than  explain  the  Articles,  and  are  inconsistent 
with  the  duty  of  receiving  and  teaching  them  in  good  faith,  to  which 
the  University,  by  express  statute,  binds  her  Tutors  and  other 
members ;  how  would  a  College  Tutor  (to  take  the  simplest  case  first) 
have  to  act  under  such  circumstances,  supposing  him  convinced  that 
the  condemned  view  is  the  right  one?  Would  it  not  be  a  plain 
breach  of  a  human  trust,  if  he  used  the  authority  committed  to  him 
for  the  purpose  of  teaching  that  view  ?  and  of  a  still  higher  trust,  if,  in 
compliance  with  the  academical  law,  he  forbore  to  inculcate  it  ?  "  ^ 

To  this  question  Keble's  very  proper  answer  was  : — 
"  Such  persons  would  have  been  met  at  every  turn  by  the 
recorded  sentence  of  the  University  against  them  :  in  them 
it  would  have  been  no  contumacy,  but  plain  conscientious- 
ness, to  withdraw  from  an  engagement  which  they  could 
not  religiously  fulfil."  ^  Passing  from  the  Tutors  to  ordi- 
nary members  of  the  University,  Keble  affirmed  that  "  it 
would  be  matter  of  grave  inquiry,  whether  any  person, 
adhering  to  the  Articles  in  the  sense  pointed  out  by  the 
Tract,  could  with  an  unblemished  conscience  become  a 
member  of  the  University,  or  even,  without  dispensation, 
continue  such.  This  doubt  arises  from  the  acknowledged 
rule  of  the  best  casuists,  that  all  oaths  and  covenants 
imposed  by  a  superior,  and  especially  subscriptions  re- 
quired to  Articles  of  religion,  are  to  be  interpreted  by  the  mind 
and  purpose  of  the  parties  imposing,  and  in  the  sense  which 
they  intended."  ^  According  to  this  important  principle, 
issued  with  the  sanction  of  the  leader  of  the  Oxford  Move- 
ment, no  candidate  for  Ordination  could  sign  the  Thirty- 
Nine  Articles,  when  imposed  by  the  Bishop  about  to  ordain 
him,  except  in  the  sense  held  by  that  Bishop.  If  this  rule 
were  adopted  by  modern  Ritualists,  many  Romanising 
wolves  would  be  kept  out  of  the  sheepfold  of  the  Church 
of  England. 

Keble  proceeded  to  discuss  Clerical  subscription  to  the 
Articles.     On  this  he  affirms  that  "  The  general  principles 

1   The  Case  of  Catholic  Subscription  to  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles  Considered, 

p.  13- 

-  Ibid.  p.  1 6.  ^  Ibid.  p.  17. 


KEBLE    ON    CATHOLIC    SUBSCRIPTION  1 75 

which  regulate  Academical  subscription  must  of  course  be 
applicable  to  Clerical  subscription  likewise  ;  only  that  all 
cases  of  conscience  assume  a  deeper  and  more  awful 
interest  as  they  come  nearer  and  nearer  to  the  Most  Holy 
Things  "  :  ^ — 

"  If  a  candidate  for  Holy  Orders,  or  a  clerk  nominated  to  any 
dignity  or  cure,  were  distinctly  warned,  by  the  same  authority  which 
calls  on  him  to  subscribe  the  Articles,  that  the  Catholic  mode  of 
interpreting  them  would  be  considered  as  '  evading  their  sense,'  and 
'defeating  their  object ' ;  the  act  of  signature  would  evidently  amount 
to  a  pledge  on  his  part  against  that  mode  of  interpretation.  If,  in 
virtue  of  a  preceding  signature,  he  were  already  exercising  his 
ministry,  his  going  on,  without  protest,  to  do  so,  after  such  warning, 
would  virtually  come  to  the  same  thing :  it  would  be  equivalent,  as 
I  said  before,  to  a  continued  signature ;  unless,  indeed,  he  could 
obtain  from  the  imposers  express  or  implied  dispensation  for  his 
own  case,  which  would  remove  the  sin,  and,  if  made  public,  would 
remove  the  scandal  also, 

"  But  Clerical  Subscription  differs  from  Academical  in  this  im- 
portant respect :  that  it  is  not  quite  so  easy  to  determine  who  are 
the  real  imposers  of  it,  and  what  kind  of  declaration  on  their  part  is 
to  be  regarded  as  authoritative.  Thus  far,  however,  all  Catholics 
will  be  agreed :  that  a  Synodical  determination  of  the  Bishops  of 
the  Church  of  England,  with  or  without  the  superadded  warrant  of 
the  State  (on  whose  prerogative  in  such  cases  I  would  refrain  from 
here  expressing  any  opinion)  would  be  endued  with  unquestionable 
authority."  2 

Keble  next  proceeds  to  discuss  the  subject  of  Canonical 
Obedience  to  the  Bishops  ;  and  here  his  views,  I  think, 
would  certainly  not,  as  a  whole,  be  acceptable  to  his 
Ritualistic  successors  of  the  present  day.  If  Keble  could 
not  conscientiously  obey  his  Bishop,  he  would  resign  his 
preferments  in  the  Church,  and  retire  into  lay  communion, 
though  he  would  not  secede  from  the  Church  of  England. 
His  words  are  remarkable,  and  well  worth  quoting : — 

"Next,"  he  writes,  "let  it  be  well  weighed  how  much  the  Oath 
of  Canonical  Obedience  imports.  No  pledge  can  be  more  solemn 
or  direct,  than  that  under  which  we  stand  bound  '  reverently  to  obey 

^  The  Case  of  Catholic  Subscription  to  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles  Considered, 
p.  25.  ^  Ibid.  pp.  26,  27. 


176  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

our  Ordinary,  and  other  chief  Ministers,  unto  whom  is  committed 
the  charge  and  government  over  us;  following  with  a  glad  mind 
and  will  their  godly  admonitions,  and  subtnittitig  ourselves  to  their 
godly  judgments.^  This  latter  clause  appears  to  refer,  more  espe- 
cially, to  doctrinal  decisions ;  and  if  to  any,  surely  most  especially 
to  their  explanation  of  the  terms  of  the  engagement,  to  which  they 
themselves  admitted  us  :  as  the  Church's  agents,  it  is  true,  and  not 
in  any  wise  by  their  own  independent  authority ;  yet  as  deliberative, 
responsible,  highly  trusted  agents,  endowed  severally  with  powers 
of  more  than  human  origin,  to  enforce  their  'godly  judgments.'  So 
that  it  would  be  a  very  strong  step  indeed,  and  one  hardly  conceiv- 
able, but  in  a  case  where  the  very  foundation  of  the  faith  was  un- 
equivocally assailed,  for  a  Catholic  priest  to  go  on  ministering,  when 
he  knew  that  he  was  violating  the  conditions  on  which  his  Bishop 
would  allow  him  to  minister.  It  would  be  far  different  from  in- 
subordinate conduct  here  and  there,  in  points  of  detail :  rather  his 
whole  clerical  life  would  be  one  continued  act  of  disobedience.  Who 
could  endure  such  a  burthen  ?  What  labour  could  prosper,  what 
blessing  be  looked  for,  under  it?""^ 

Keble,  of  course,  was  afraid  lest  the  Convocation  of 
the  University  and  the  Bishops  should  censure  the  line  of 
argument  adopted  by  Newman  in  Tract  XC,  and,  therefore, 
in  writing  his  pamphlet  he  had  the  possibility  of  such  a 
censure  in  view.  Unfortunately  for  the  cause  of  Reforma- 
tion principles,  his  fears  were  groundless.  Convocation  had 
before  it,  on  February  13,  1845,  a  proposition  to  adopt 
substantially  the  vote  of  censure  passed  by  the  Heads  of 
Houses  on  March  16,  184 1.  It  would,  in  all  probability, 
have  been  carried,  were  it  not  that  the  Proctors  (of  whom 
the  late  Dean  Church  was  one),  vetoed  it.  Although  most 
of  the  Bishops  in  their  charges  censured  Tract  XC,  no  united 
declaration  against  its  mischievous  principles  was  issued  by 
the  Episcopal  Bench.  Dr.  Pusey  issued  a  bulky  pamphlet 
of  217  pages  in  defence  of  Tract  XC,  in  which  he  strongly 
advocated  the  *Reunion  of  Christendom,  both  East  and 
West.  "Who  knows,"  he  asked,  "but  that  He  who  raises  us 
up,  may  purify  Rome  too,  and  St.  Peter  be  the  type  of  the 
Church  of  St.  Peter,  and  her  Lord  yet  cast  His  gracious  look 

^  The  Case  of  Catholic  Subscription  to  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles  Considered, 
pp.  28,  29. 


manning's  dislike  of  tract  xc.  177 

upon  her,  and  she  weep  bitterly  her  fall ;  and  she,  being  'con- 
verted,' '  strengthen  '  her  '  brethren,'  atid  deserve  to  be  restored 
to  the  pre-eminence^  which,  while  she  deserved,  she  had."  ^ 
Piisey,  in  this  pamphlet,  censured  many  of  the  corruptions 
of  Rome,  more  especially  her  worship  of  the  Virgin,  and 
the  Indulgences  granted  by  the  Papal  Court.  But,  as  to 
the  Tract  itself,  he  declares  : — "  I  have  felt  no  doubt,  care- 
fully and  conscientiously  examining  both  editions  of  the 
Ty-act,  that  the  meaning  in  which  our  friend  would  have 
them  [Thirty-Nine  Articles]  construed,  in  conformity  and 
subordination  to  the  teaching  of  the  Catholic  Church,  is 
not  only  an  admissible,  but  the  most  legitimate  interpreta- 
tion of  them."  ^ 

Later  on  in  the  year,  the  Rev.  C.  P.  Golightly,  of  Oriel 
College,  who  had  been  one  of  the  most  active  workers  in 
getting  up  the  agitation  against  Tract  XC,  issued  a  short 
pamphlet  of  nineteen  pages  on  the  subject,  in  which  he 
ably  exposed  some  of  Newman's  misquotations  in  the  Tract, 
as  also  the  alterations  made  by  him  in  the  second  edition. 
It  is  remarkable  that  Manning  (afterwards  Cardinal),  who 
had  become  a  High  Churchman  before  Tract  XC.  was  issued, 
never  approved  of  its  leading  principles.  Mr.  A.  W.  Hutton, 
M.A.,  in  his  biography  of  Cardinal  Manning,  tells  us  that 
"  Manning  never  got  over  the  dislike  he  entertained  for 
T7-act  XC.  It  always  seemed  to  him  of  doubtful  honesty. 
When,  in  the  autumn  of  1845,  after  his  return  from  his 
first  visit  to  Dollinger  at  Munich,  Mr.  Gladstone,  much 
perturbed  by  the  grave  series  of  secessions  from  the  Church 
of  England,  asked  Manning  if  any  one  principle  could  be 
found  that  would  explain  them,  the  latter  said,  after  reflec- 
tion : — 'Yes  ;  want  of  truth!  At  a  much  later  time  he  said 
that  he  thought  he  must  have  had  in  his  mind  the  impres- 
sion of  dishonesty  produced  by  the  shifty  arguments  of 
the  last  Tract:'  ^ 

In  1845,  the  Rev.  W.  Simcox  Bricknell,  M.A.,  Incum- 

^  The  Articles  Treated  on  in  Tract  XC.  Reconsidered,  and  their  Interpretation 
Vindicated.     By  the  Rev,  E.  B.  Pusey,  D.D.,  p.  183. 
^  Ibid.  p.  148. 
*  Cardinal  Manning.     By  Arthur  W.  Hutton,  M.A.,  p.  252.     London:  1894. 

M 


178  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

bent  of  Grove,  published  a  thick  volume  of  753  pages, 
with  the  title  of  The  Judgment  of  the  Bishops  upon  Tractarian 
Theology.  It  consisted  mainly  of  lengthy  extracts  from  the 
Charges  of  the  Bishops  from  1837  to  1842  inclusive,  and 
was  enriched  by  many  useful  notes  from  the  pen  of  Mr. 
Bricknell  himself.  From  this  volume  I  give  the  following 
expressions  of  Episcopal  opinion  on  Tract  XC.  : — 

Bishop  of  Hereford  (Dr.  Musgrave): — "  Nothing  better,  in 
fact,  as  all  such  persons  must  well  know,  than  sophistry  and  evasion, 
could  be  brought  in  support  of  such  a  thesis.  And  certainly  both 
are  employed  in  the  Trad,  in  as  ample  measure  as  any  one  could  be 
disposed  to  anticipate."  ^ 

"  In  fact,  throughout  the  whole  Tract,  but  more  especially  upon 
this  point  [the  '  attempt  to  distinguish  between  the  Romish  doctrine, 
as  established  by  the  Decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  and  "  the 
authoritative  teaching"  of  the  Church  of  Rome  at  the  time'],  the 
dishonest  casuistry  to  which  the  Jesuits  have  given  a  name,  is 
employed  upon  a  scale  to  which  it  would  be  hard  to  find  a  parallel, 
except  in  the  more  notorious  of  their  own  writings."  ^ 

Bishop  of  Gloucester  and  Bristol  (Dr.  Monk) : — "The  per- 
usal of  the  Rcjnarks  upon  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles  has  filled  me  with 
astonishment  and  concern.  The  ostensible  object  of  this  Tract  is 
to  show  that  a  person  adopting  the  doctrines  of  the  Council  of  Trent, 
with  the  single  exception  of  the  Pope's  Supremacy,  might  sincerely 
and  conscientiously  sign  the  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England. 
But  the  real  object  at  which  the  writer  seems  to  be  labouring,  is  to 
prove  that  the  differences  in  doctrine  which  separate  the  Churches  of 
England  and  Rome  will,  upon  examination,  vanish.  Upon  this 
point  much  ingenuity,  and,  I  am  forced  to  add,  much  sojjhistry  is 
exerted,  and  I  think  exerted  in  vain."  ' 

Bishop  of  Exeter  (Dr.  Phillpotts)  : — "The  tone  of  the  Tract,  as 
it  respects  our  own  Church,  is  offensive  and  indecent ;  as  it  regards  the 
Reformation  and  our  Reformers,  absurd,  as  well  as  incongruous  and 
unjust.  Its  principles  of  interpreting  our  Articles  I  cannot  but 
deem  most  unsound  ;  the  reasoning  with  which  it  supports  its  prin- 
ciples, sophistical ;  the  averments  on  which  it  founds  its  reasoning, 
at  variance  with  recorded  facts."  * 


^  'S>ncknt\VsJttdg»ient  of  the  Bishops,  p.  8l. 

i  IbiJ.  p.  85. 

s  Ibid.  p.  537. 

*  Ibid.  p.  547. 


EPISCOPAL    OPINION    OF   TRACT    XC.  1 79 

"This  is  by  far  the  most  daring  attempt  ever  yet  made  by  a 
Minister  of  the  Church  of  England  to  neutralise  the  distinctive 
doctrines  of  our  Church,  and  to  make  us  symbolise  with  Rome."  ^ 

Bishop  of  Llandaff  (Dr.  Copleston) : — "To  speak  of  the 
language  of  the  Articles  as  being  capable  of  two  or  more  senses,  and 
to  teach  that  the  subscriber  may  therefore  take  them  in  his  own 
sense,  knowing  at  the  same  time  that  the  authority  which  requires 
his  assent  understands  them  in  another,  is  surely  a  dishonest  course, 
tending  to  corrupt  the  conscience,  and  to  destroy  all  confidence 
between  man  and  man."  ^ 

Bishop  of  London  (Dr.  Blomfield): — "  The  endeavour  to  give  a 
Tridentine  colouring  to  the  Articles  of  Religion  agreed  upon  by  the 
Council  of  London  in  1562,  and  to  extenuate  the  essential  differences 
between  the  two  Churches,  is  a  ground  of  no  unreasonable  alarm  to 
those  whose  bounden  duty  it  is  to  '  banish  and  drive  away  all  erro- 
neous and  strange  doctrines,'  and  therefore  to  guard  against  the 
insinuation  into  our  Church  of  any  one  of  those  false  opinions  which 
she  has  once  solemnly  repudiated.  It  is  one  of  the  methods  by 
which  the  Court  of  Rome  has  before  sought  to  beguile  the  people  of 
this  country  of  their  common  sense.  Bishop  Stillingfleet  quotes  a 
letter  of  advice  given  to  a  Romish  agent,  as  to  the  best  way  of 
managing  the  Papal  interest  in  England  upon  the  King's  restoration  : 
the  third  head  of  which  is : — 

"  '  To  make  it  appear,  underhand,  how  near  the  doctrine,  worship, 
and  discipline  of  the  Church  of  England  comes  to  us  (of  Rome) ; 
at  how  little  distance  her  Common  Prayer  is  from  our  Mass ;  and 
that  the  wisest  and  ablest  men  of  that  way  (the  Anglican)  are  so 
moderate,  that  they  would  willingly  come  over  to  us,  or  at  least  meet 
us  half  way.  Hereby  the  more  staid  men  will  become  more  odious, 
and  others  will  run  out  of  all  religion  for  fear  of  Popery.' "  ^ 

^  BricknelVsyudgmefii  0/  iAe  Bi's/io/is,  p.  55a 

2  /ill/,  p.  559. 

»  /did.  pp.  563,  564. 


CHAPTER  VII 

Mr.  Golightly's  letters  to  the  Standard — His  serious  charges  against 
Ward  and  Bloxam — Palmer  of  Magdalen  anathematises  Protes- 
tantism— Startling  revelations — Mr.  Ambrose  Phillipps  de  Lisle — 
A  secret  Papal  emissary  to  the  Oxford  Romanisers — De  Lisle  inti- 
mate with  and  trusted  by  the  Oxford  leaders — Newman's  Corre- 
spondence with  De  Lisle — De  Lisle  hopes  to  introduce  some  foreign 
Theologians  to  his  Oxford  friends — He  promises  to  be  "prudent 
and  reserved  " — Bloxam's  fear  of  publicity — De  Lisle's  extraordi- 
nary letter  to  his  wife — The  Oxford  men  wish  "  to  come  to  an  under- 
standing with  the  Pope  at  once" — Their  proposals  to  be  sent  to  the 
Pope — The  Fathers  of  Charity — A  startling  suggestion — Cordial 
meetings  at  Oxford  between  the  Tractarians  and  Romanists — Nego- 
tiations with  Wiseman  and  Rome — Wiseman  visits  Oxford — Has  an 
interview  with  Newman — Wiseman  writes  to  Rome  for  secret  in- 
struction and  guidance — He  desires  to  become  "the  organ  of  inter- 
course" between  Rome  and  Oxford — A  secret  conspiracy — De  Lisle's 
letter  to  Lord  Shrewsbury — It  is  necessary  "to  blind"  the  Low 
Chiirch  party — "Throwing  dust  in  the  eyes  of  Low  Churchmen" — 
"Unpleasant  disclosures"  in  the  papers — "A  holy  reserve" — Ward's 
double  dealing — Remains  in  the  Church  of  England  "to  bring  many 
towards  Rome" — The  ultimate  aim  "submission  to  Rome." 

Events  of  great  interest  were  taking  place  wliile  the  con- 
troversy as  to  Tract  XC.  was  at  its  height,  of  which  the 
English  public  knew  at  the  time  but  little  or  nothing.  It 
is  true  the  veil  was  partly  lifted  by  the  Rev.  C.  P. 
Golightly,  in  the  columns  of  the  Standard,  but  his  revela- 
tions were  laughed  to  scorn  by  his  opponents,  as  utterly 
unworthy  of  credit.  Time,  however,  has  served  to  prove 
that  Mr.  Golightly  was  a  truthful  witness,  for  the  accuracy 
of  his  exposure  of  Tractarian  tactics  and  underground 
proceedings,  has  been  amply  proved  by  the  biographies 
of  Cardinal  Wiseman,  Mr.  Ambrose  Phillipps  de  Lisle,  the 
Rev.  W.  G.  Ward,  and  others.  In  a  letter  to  the  Standard, 
dated  November  12,  1841,  over  the  signature  of  "A 
Master  of  Arts,"  Mr.  Golightly  brought  charges  of  Roman- 


MR.    GOLIGHTLY    EXPOSES    THE    ROMANISERS         l8l 

ising  against  certain  members  of  the  University,  whose 
names  he  did  not  give  ;  thereupon  he  was  challenged  by 
a  "  D.D.  of  the  University  of  Oxford,"  and  by  the  Rev. 
George  Stanley  Faber,  Master  of  Sherburn  Hospital,  and 
himself  a  decided  Protestant,  to  give  his  own  name  to  the 
public,  and  also  the  names  of  those  against  whom  he  had 
brought  such  serious  charges.  In  reply  to  these  chal- 
lenges, Mr.  Golightly,  over  his  own  proper  signature,  wrote 
another  letter  to  the  Standard,  dated  November  26th,  in 
which,  after  thanking  those  who  had  challenged  him  for 
doing  so,  he  continued  : — 

"  My  statement,  in  allusion  to  a  paragraph  which  had  appeared  in 
the  Mornwg  Post,  was  as  follows  : — 

"  *  I  do  not  insinuate,  but  I  assert,  that  there  is  good  reason  for 
supposing  that  there  are  about  ten  Members  of  this  University,  who, 
instead  of  fighting  "  under  their  proper  banner,"  have  hoisted  the 
flag  of  Anglicanism,  and,  under  those  false  colours,  are  taking  advan- 
tage of  their  respective  positions,  as  Fellows  of  Colleges  and  Clergy- 
men of  the  Established  C'nurch,  to  propagate  "  Romanism,"  and 
oppose  "primitive  views." ' 

"  I  likewise  made  a  statement  respecting  the  conduct  of  a  Fellow 
of  Balliol,  and  a  Fellow  of  Magdalen,  which  I  shall  repeat  in  the 
course  of  my  letter.  .  .  . 

"  The  first  witness  that  I  shall  cite  is  the  Rev.  W.  Ward,  Fellow 
of  Balliol  College,  and  an  intimate  friend  of  Mr.  Newman's,  who,  in 
the  course  of  the  present  month,  told  a  friend  of  mine,  opposed  to 
him  in  opinions,  and  not  in  confidential  conversation,  that  a  certain 
party  in  this  place  [Oxford  University]  might  now  be  considered  to 
be  divided  into  disciples  of  Mr.  Newman  and  disciples  of  Dr.  Pusey 
— the  latter  opposed,  the  former  no  longer  opposed  to  Rome.  .  .  . 

"  I  now  repeat  the  assertion  in  my  former  letter,  that  the  Rev. 
W.  Ward,  Fellow  of  Balliol,  was  a  visitor  of  Dr.  Wiseman's,  at 
Oscott,  during  the  last  long  vacation  (I  do  not  determine  the  length 
of  his  visit),  and  that  the  Rev.  J.  Bloxam,  Fellow  of  Magdalen, 
was  the  individual  who  introduced  Mr.  Sibthorp  to  Dr.  Wiseman. 
Previously  to  his  visit  to  Oscott,  Mr.  Ward  had  expressed  opinions 
which  induced  the  Master  of  Balliol  to  deprive  him  of  his  Mathe- 
matical Lectureship,  and  the  Bishop  of  London  to  forbid  his  offici- 
ating in  his  diocese. 

"I  have  also  to  inform  the  public,  that  a  Roman  Catholic 
Bishop  has  been  staying  at  the  Mitre  Inn,  at  Oxford,  and  receiving 


1 82  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

visits  from  several  Members  of  the  University.  Upon  communi- 
cating this  fact  to  an  individual  in  authority,  I  found  that  he  had 
already  learned,  from  other  sources  of  information,  that  one  cer- 
tainly, perhaps  two  Romish  Bishops  had  been  returning  the  visits 
of  their  friend  or  friends.  .  .  . 

"  After  what  I  have  written,  your  readers  will  not  be  surprised 
at  the  following  sayings  and  doings  of  some  of  the  more  extravagant 
of  the  party.  A  Fellow  of  Exeter  has  expressed  his  belief,  that  seven 
years  hence  the  Churches  of  England  and  Rome  will  be  reunited ; 
some  cross  themselves  in  public  worship,  others  make  genuflections, 
others  openly  praise  the  Jesuits,  talk  of  Saint  Ignatius  Loyola,  have 
plans  for  taming  refractory  Bishops,  and  talk  over  what  they  shall 
do,  in  their  day  of  triumph,  with  the  clergy  who  reject  their  views."  ^ 

The  only  members  of  the  Romanising  party  who  re- 
plied to  Mr.  Golightly's  charges  were  Ward  himself,  one 
of  the  accused  parties,  and  the  Rev.  William  Palmer  of 
Magdalen  College,  who  must  not  be  confounded  with 
the  Rev.  William  Palmer  of  Worcester  College.  Ward 
frankly  admitted  that  he  had  paid  a  visit  to  Oscott,  but 
he  did  not  add  that  it  was  his  second  visit  ^ — Golightly 
apparently  did  not  know  that  there  had  been  a  previous 
visit.  Ward  challenged  the  accuracy  of  two  or  three 
of  Golightly's  statements,  yet  substantially  he  admitted 
that  they  were  correct.  In  acknowledging  that  he  had 
paid  a  visit  to  the  Roman  Catholic  College  at  Oscott,  he 
explained  that  he  "  carefully  abstained  from  taking  part 
in  any  of  their  services "  ;  ^  yet  at  the  same  time  he 
admitted  "  the  very  favourable  impression  produced  on 
my  mind  by  all  that  I  saw  there."  ^ 

Mr.  Palmer,  who,  after  several  years  spent  in  vain 
efforts  to  promote  Reunion  with  the  Eastern  Churches, 
afterwards  became  a  Roman  Catholic,  replied  to  Mr. 
Golightly  in  a  published  Letter,  which  contained  some 
statements  which  created  quite  a  sensation  : — "  I  trust," 
said  Mr.  Palmer,  "others  have  still  stronger  grounds  for 

^  Correspondence  Illustrative  of  the  Actual  State  of  Oxford  with  Reference  to 
Tractarianism,  pp.  8-13.     Oxford  :  1842. 

"^  William  George  IVard  and  the  Oxford  Movement,  p.  191. 

^  Corres/'ondence  Illustrative  of  the  Actual  State  of  Oxford,  p.  20. 

■*  Ibid,  p.  19. 


ANATHEMA    TO    PROTESTANTISM  1 83 

viewing  and  representing  it  [the  Church  of  England]  as  a 
branch  of  the  One  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church,  essen- 
tially opposed  to  the  principle  of  general  Protestantism, 
and  essentially  one  with  all  other  Churches  of  kindred 
origin,  both  Greek  and  Latin."  ^ 

"Certainly  I  am  for  no  middle  ways,"  continued  Mr.  Palmer, 
"as  you  will  understand  when  I  tell  you  plainly,  that  for  myself,  I 
utterly  reject  and  anathematise  the  principle  of  Protestantism  as  a 
heresy,  with  all  its  forms,  sects,  or  denominations.  And  if  the 
Church  of  England  should  ever  unhappily  profess  herself  to  be  a 
form  of  Protestantism  (which  may  God  of  His  infinite  mercy  forbid  !) 
then  I  would  reject  and  anathematise  the  Church  of  England,  and 
would  separate  myself  from  her  immediately  as  from  a  human  sect, 
without  giving  Protestants  any  unnecessary  trouble  to  procure  my 
expulsion."  ^ 

"  If  to  desire  the  restoration  of  unity  with  those  Churches,  and 
above  all  with  the  Church  of  Rome  itself,  be  Popery,  then  I  for  one 
am  a  Papist  from  the  very  bottom  of  my  soul;  but  I  beg  you  to 
take  notice  at  the  same  time  that  my  Popery  is  of  a  kind  which 
takes  in  not  only  the  Churches  now  in  actual  communion  with 
Rome,  but  also  the  Eastern  Catholic  Churches,  and  the  British,  if 
their  Protestant  members  will  allow  me  still  to  call  them  Catholic. 
In  conclusion,  I  once  more  publicly  profess  myself  a  Catholic  and 
a  member  of  the  Catholic  Church,  and  say  anathema  to  the  prin- 
ciples of  Protestantism  (which  I  regard  as  identical  with  the  principle 
of  Dissent),  and  to  all  its  forms,  sects,  and  denominations,  especially 
to  those  of  the  Lutherans  and  Calvinists,  and  British  and  American 
Dissenters.  Likewise  to  all  persons,  who  knowingly  and  willingly, 
afid  understanding  what  they  do,  shall  assert  either  for  themselves  or 
for  the  Church  of  England  the  principle  of  Protestantism,  or  maintain 
the  Church  of  England  to  have  one  and  the  same  common  religion 
with  any  or  all  of  the  various  forms  and  sects  of  Protestantism,  or 
shall  communicate  themselves  in  the  temples  of  the  Protestant  sects, 
or  give  the  communion  to  their  members,  or  go  about  to  establish 
any  intercommunion  between  our  Church  and  them,  otherwise  than 
by  bringing  them,  in  the  first  instance,  to  renounce  their  errors  and 
promise  a  true  obedience  for  the  future  to  the  entire  faith  and 
discipline  of  the  Catholic  and  Apostolical  Episcopate — to  all  such  I 
say,  Anathema  /  "  ^ 

1  A  Letter  to  the  Rev.  C.  P.  Golightlv.      By  William  Palmer,  M.A.,  Fellow 
and  Tutor  of  Magdalen  College,  p.  7.     Oxford  :  Parker.     1842. 
"^  Ibid.  pp.  9,  10.  3  jbid,  pp.  12,  13. 


184  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD   MOVEMENT 

I  may  here  be  permitted  to  point  out  that  the  argu- 
ment against  the  Protestantism  of  the  Church  of  England, 
based  on  the  omission  of  the  word  **  Protestant "  from  her 
formularies,  is  valueless  to  the  Ritualists.  The  word  on 
which  they  pride  themselves  is  "Catholic,"  which  of  course 
is  also  claimed  by  all  true  Protestants.  Yet  this  much- 
prized  word  "Catholic"  is  never  found  in  the  New  Testament. 
Would  the  Ritualists,  I  may  ask,  think  me  justified  in 
asserting  that  the  "  Catholic "  religion  is  not  to  be  found 
in  the  New  Testament,  because  the  word  "Catholic"  is  not 
found  there  ?  I  am  sure  they  would  never  allow  that  my 
argument  was  valid.  They  would  reply  that,  if  the  word 
"  Catholic  "  was  not  there,  the  thing  itself  was  there  from 
beginning  to  end,  and  that  therefore  the  New  Testament 
teaches  the  Catholic  religion.  But,  surely,  the  argument 
which  the  Ritualist  would  think  good  for  himself,  is  equally 
valid  for  the  Protestant  Churchman  ?  We  argue  that  if 
the  word  "  Protestant "  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer,  the  thing  itself  is  there  in  abundance 
from  cover  to  cover.  In  their  assertions  of  Protestant 
doctrines,  and  in  their  protests  against  Rome  and  Roman- 
ism, the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  and  the  Thirty-Nine 
Articles  are  amongst  the  most  strongly  Protestant  docu- 
ments in  the  whole  world.  The  historical  argument  in 
favour  of  the  Protestantism  of  the  Church  of  England  is 
ably  brought  out  in  a  valuable  pamphlet  by  the  late  Dr. 
Fleming,  entitled  The  Church  of  England  is  Protestant} 

We  must  go  back  to  the  month  of  March  1841  for  the 
origin  of  the  Romanising  work  in  part  only  revealed  by  Mr. 
Golightly.  Some  startling  revelations  of  what  then  took 
place  have  recently  been  published  in  the  Life  and  Letters  of 
Ambrose  Phillipps  de  Lisle,  who  in  later  life  changed  his  name. 
In  1 84 1  he  was  known  as  Mr.  Ambrose  Lisle  Phillipps. 
He  was,  as  already  stated,  a  county  squire  residing  at 
Grace  Dieu  Manor,  Leicestershire,  of  considerable  wealth, 
who  in  his  boyhood  had  seceded  to  the  Church  of  Rome, 

^  The  Church  of  England  is  Protestant :  Historical  Testimony  to  Her  Pro- 
testantism. By  J.  P.  Fleming,  D.C.L.,  pp.  26.  London :  Church  Association 
Office. 


WISEMAN'S    SECRET    EMISSARY    TO    OXFORD  1 85 

in  1825,  when  he  was  only  sixteen  years  of  age.  From 
the  birth  of  the  Oxford  Movement  young  Mr.  PhilHpps 
took  the  deepest  interest  in  its  proceedings,  expecting 
great  things  for  the  Church  of  Rome  from  its  operations. 
To  help  on  the  Oxford  Movement  became  the  great  object 
of  his  life.  Early  in  1841  he  became,  in  reality,  though 
not  in  name.  Bishop  Wiseman's  secret  emissary  to  the 
leaders  of  the  Movement  residing  in  the  University  of 
Oxford  ;  and  the  medium  of  communicating  their  wishes 
and  hopes,  through  Wiseman,  to  the  Pope  himself.  His 
biography,  written  by  Mr.  E.  S.  Purcell,  author  of  the  Life 
of  Cardinal  Manning,  is  very  open  indeed  in  its  surprising 
revelations.     Mr.  Purcell  tells  us  that : — 

"  The  personal  influence  of  so  zealous  a  Catholic  as  De  Lisle,  his 
sympathy  with  the  Movement  and  reverence  for  its  leaders,  was 
recognised  and  felt  at  Oxford.  He  was  on  intimate  terms  with 
many  of  them,  with  whom  he  corresponded  fully  and  freely;  he  was 
trusted  by  their  illustrious  Leader,  who  in  many  letters  of  the  highest 
interest  discussed  the  points  at  issue  between  the  Anglican  Church 
and  the  Church  of  Rome.  With  no  other  Catholic  was  Newman 
on  terfns  of  such  intimacy  ;  to  no  one  else  did  he  opeti  his  heart  so  fully 
or  explain  so  candidly  the  motives  which  guided  his  conduct  or  line 
of  action  as  Leader  of  the  Movement.  To  no  one  did  he  disclose 
more  unreservedly  perhaps  than  to  De  Lisle  the  difficulties  which 
stood  in  the  way  of  reunion,  or  of  the  restoration  of  unity  of  faith. 
For  Newman  it  7vas  easier  perhaps  to  explaiti  to  a  Catholic  than  to 
his  itntnediate  disciples  the  necessity  of  restraint  or  of  caution  imposed 
upon  him  by  external  circumstances  :  by  fear,  on  the  one  hand,  of 
exciting  in  the  University  Protestant  suspicions ;  of  arousing  the 
ire  of  the  Bishops ;  or,  on  the  other,  of  giving  scandal  to  the  more 
timid  among  his  own  disciples  by  too  open  an  avowal  of  Catholic 
principles."^ 

This  statement  shows  the  importance  to  be  attached 
to  De  Lisle's  work  at  Oxford.  Newman  trusted  him 
more,  and  more  fully  opened  up  to  him  his  secret  plans, 
than  to  either  Pusey  or  Keble,  or  any  other  of  his  friends 
in  the  Church  of  England.  And  it  is  evident  to  any  one 
reading  De  Lisle's  biography  that  he  was  trusted  and 
consulted  by  most  of  the  other  more  prominent  members 

^  Life  and  Letters  of  Ambrose  Phillipps  de  Lisle,  vol.  i.  p.  198. 


1 86  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

of  Newman's  followers.  One  of  the  chief  agents  in 
preparing  the  way  for  De  Lisle's  early  visits  to  Oxford  was 
the  Rev.  J.  R.  Bloxam,  then  Newman's  Curate,  who  was 
most  anxious  to  promote  the  Reunion  of  England  and 
Rome,  but  who  remained  within  the  Church  of  England 
until  his  death  nearly  fifty  years  later. 

De  Lisle  was  first  brought  into  intimate  relations  with 
the  leaders  of  the  Oxford  Movement  early  in  1841.  On 
the  first  Sunday  in  Lent  of  that  year  he  sent  word  to 
Bloxam  that  he  hoped  to  visit  Oxford  in  Easter  week  : — 

"  I  hope,"  he  told  Bloxam,  "  to  be  the  tneans  of  ifttroducing  to 
Oxford  some  foreign  Theologians  who,  I  assure  you,  thoroughly 
appreciate  the  Catholic  Movement  there,  who  admire  your  admir- 
able treatises,  who  fully  understand  the  difficulty  of  your  position, 
who  see  that  humanly  speaking  the  great  result  to  which  we  look 
must  be  distant,  the  fruit  of  much  labour,  much  patience,  much 
tribulation,  but  who  feel  that  God  holds  in  his  hands  the  hearts  of 
men,  and  that  to  humble,  earnest,  believing  prayer  he  will  refuse 
nothing.  In  working  out  our  grand  object  you  will  find  me,  and 
those  whom  I  hope  in  a  second  visit  to  present  to  the  acquaintance 
both  of  yourself  and  your  friends,  prudent  and  reserved ;  in  fact  we 
shall  put  ourselves  unreservedly  in  your  hands — our  only  object  is  to 
serve  you  for  the  love  of  Jesus  Christ,  and^r  the  love  of  our  Catholic 
Mother:'  ^ 

Newman  at  this  time  entered  into  confidential  corre- 
spondence with  De  Lisle,  and  also  with  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Russell,  of  Maynooth  College.  The  latter  correspondence 
was  first  published  in  the  Irish  Monthly  for  September 
1892.  Of  Dr.  Russell,  Newman  says,  "  He  had,  perhaps, 
more  to  do  with  my  conversion  than  any  one  else."  ^ 
Newman  saw  great  difficulties  in  the  way  of  Reunion. 
The  lack  of  personal  holiness  in  the  Roman  Church  was 
one  difficulty ;  the  existence  of  Protestantism  in  the  Angli- 
can Church  was  another.  "This  I  feel,"  he  wrote  on 
February  25,  1841,  ''most  strongly  and  cannot  conceal  it, 
viz.,  that  while  Rome  is  what  she  is  union  is  impossible. 
That  we  too  must  change  I  cannot  deny."  ^      Mr.  Bloxam 

^  Life  and  Letters  of  Ambrose  Phillipps  de  Lisle,  voL  i.  pp.  203,  204. 

^  Newman's  Apologia,  p.  317. 

^  Life  and  I^etiers  of  Ambrose  Phillipps  de  Lisle,  vol.  i.  p.  205. 


A    SCANDALOUS    PROPOSAL  1 87 

was  fearful  lest  the  public  should  learn  what  was  going 
on,  and  therefore  he  wrote  to  De  Lisle,  shortly  before 
the  latter  gentleman's  visit  to  Oxford  : — "  Let  me  beg 
of  you  to  consider  as  most  confidential  and  private 
whatever  may  have  passed  between  us.  Much  mischief 
has  been  done  by  the  mention  of  names."  ^  Mr.  Purcell 
says  that  "  Bloxam  was  the  most  cautious  and  timid  of 
men,  unwilling  to  commit  himself,  a  living  and  moving 
secret."  ^ 

At  length  De  Lisle  paid  his  long  expected  visit  to 
Oxford,  and  was  received  with  open  arms  by  the  Roman- 
isers.  To  his  wife,  on  May  5th,  he  related  with  great  joy 
what  up  to  that  date  he  had  seen  and  heard : — 

"You  can  have  no  idea,"  wrote  De  Lisle,  "to  what  an  extent 
the  Catholic  Movement  in  this  University  has  gone ;  it  is  impossible 
to  judge  of  it  by  printed  publications.  One  thing  astonislied  and 
delighted  me.  They  have  lately  printed  (put  not  published)  a  beauti- 
ful translation  of  the  Roman  Breviary  in  English,  with  everything  pre- 
cisely as  it  is  in  the  Latin.  The  Hail  Mary  full  length,  the  Conjiteor, 
the  Salve  Regina,  Sanda  Maria  succurre  miseris,  &c.,  with  not  an 
expression  changed  ! !  !  Is  not  this  wonderful  ?  Nothing  can  be 
more  determined  than  they  are  to  reunite  their  Church  to  the 
Catholic ;  but  they  will  not  hear  of  individuals  joining  us  from  the?fi, 
though  they  tvish  us  to  convert  as  many  Dissenters  as  possible ;  and 
they  are  very  glad  to  hear  of  Dr.  Gentili's  doings  in  that  way — even 
I  think  they  do  not  object  to  our  converting  such  of  the  Church  of 
England  as  do  not  hold  Catholic  views,  but  they  deprecate  any 
noise  about  it,  and  above  all  they  deprecate  anything  like  warfare 
against  the  Church  of  England  herself.  .  .  .     Many  here  would 

LIKE  TO  COME  TO  AN  UNDERSTANDING  WITH  THE  POPE  AT  ONCE, 
THAT  so  THEY  MIGHT  BE  IN  ACTIVE  COMMUNION  WITH  HIM,  AND  YET 
REMAIN  IN  THE  ChURCH  OF  ENGLAND  TO  LABOUR  FOR  THE  RECON- 
CILIATION OF  THEIR  WHOLE  Church.  This  is  to  be  taken  into 
solemn  consideration  ;  I  proposed  to  them  last  night  that  Father 
Rosmini  should  come  to  England  and  visit  Oxford  with  me  with  a 
view  to  conveying  their  sentiments  to  the  Pope  hitnself.  The  proposi- 
tion was  well  received ;  but  nothing  is  settled,  nor  will  be  yet."^ 

^  Life  and  Letters  of  Ambrose  Phillipps  de  Lisle,  vol.  i.  p.  216. 

^  Ibid.  p.  244. 

'  Ibid-  pp.  248,  249. 


1 88  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

The  startling  expression  of  opinion,  which  I  have 
here  printed  in  capitals,  seems  almost  incredible.  "  It  is 
difficult  to  conceive,"  says  Mr.  Purcell,  in  commenting  on 
it,  "  that  any  of  his  [De  Lisle's]  friends  at  Oxford  of  sober 
judgment  could  have  seriously  discussed  such  a  plan  as 
that  of  being  in  active  communion  with  the  Pope,  and  at 
the  same  time  remaining  in  the  Church  of  England."  ^ 
But  he  does  not  deny  that  it  was  seriously  discussed  ;  on 
the  contrary,  he  evidently  thinks  such  a  discussion  really 
did  take  place,  for  he  continues  thus :  "  But  we  must 
remember  that  the  Queen  herself  is  always  a  member  of 
the  Scotch  Kirk  when  over  the  Border,  and  this  without 
scandal  or  question  of  propriety.^  From  the  standpoint 
of  the  Roman  theologian  this  would,  of  course,  be  abso- 
lutely unwarrantable,  but  from  the  English  standpoint  of 
habitual  compromise  in  matters  of  religion  it  is  not  after  all 
so  very  startling,  once  granted  the  High  Church  preamble 
that  the  Established  Church  is  essentially  Catholic  and 
only  accidentally  Protestant.  And  De  Lisle's  whole  plan 
of  action  was  to  foster  and  encourage  every  Catholic 
tendency  and  move  amongst  Anglicans,  leaving  it  to  the 
grace  of  God  to  correct  and  harmonise  inconsistencies 
and  shortcomings." 

In  accordance  with  the  principle  here  laid  down  by 
his  biographer,  De  Lisle  did  "  foster  and  encourage  "  the 
traitorous  wishes  of  these  Tractarians.  Very  naturally 
Mr.  Purcell  tries  to  whitewash  his  own  communion,  by 
declaring  that  "  from  the  standpoint  of  the  Roman  theo- 
logian this  would,  of  course,  be  absolutely  unwarrantable  "  ; 
yet,  for  all  this  whitewashing,  the  startling  fact  remains 
that  the  proposal  was  made,  first  of  all,  not  by  the  Trac- 
tarians, but  by  a  Roman  Catholic  layman,  even  De  Lisle 
himself ;  and  it  looks  very  much  as  though  the  Jesuitical 
proposal  he  made  was  fostered  and  actively  assisted  by 
no  less  a  "  Roman  theologian  "  than  Bishop  Wiseman  ! 

In  proof  of  this  I  call  attention  to  the  following  facts. 
Mr.  Wilfrid  Ward,  the  Roman  Catholic  biographer  of  his 

^  Life  and  Letters  of  Ambrose  Phillipps  de  Lisle,  vol.  i.  p.  249. 
"^  But  she  is  not  secretly  a  member  of  the  Scotch  Kirk, 


TRAITORS    AT   WORK  1 89 

father,  the  Rev.  W.  G.  Ward,  after  relating  how  Mr. 
Bloxam  and  De  Lisle  (or  Phillipps)  first  met  by  accident, 
tells  us  that  thereupon — 

"A  friendship  was  struck  up,  and  Mr.  Bloxam  invited  him 
[Phillipps]  to  Oxford.  Here  he  met  Mr.  Ward.  Zeal  for  the  Re- 
union of  Churches  was  on  both  sides  a  bond  of  sympathy,  and  the 
two  men  sat  up  half  the  night  on  their  first  introduction  discussing 
the  prospects  of  Christendom.  Mr.  Ward  was  invited  to  meet  a 
party  of  Catholics  at  Grace  Dieu,  to  visit  Oscott,  and  to  see  the 
Cistercian  Monastery  of  Mount  St.  Bernard's.  Informal  comviuni- 
cations  were  also  ope?ied  with  Bishop  Wiseman.  The  conditions  of 
reunion  were  discussed.  The  schemes  proposed  were  Utopian,  and 
many  who  were  eager  for  them  have  in  the  event  remained  staunch 
Anglicans.  But  they  were  a  witness  to  the  irritation  caused  by  the 
action  of  the  Heads  and  Bishops,  and  to  its  tendency  to  drive  men 
towards  Rome.  Mr.  Ward  himself,  while  deeply  interested  in  the 
subject,  was  persistent  in  his  opposition  to  any  sudden  step,  and  for 
a  time  at  least  urged  that  members  of  both  Churches  should  confine 
their  energies  to  the  reform  of  the  abuses  which  disfigured  each.  .  .  . 
Mr.  Phillipps  had  urged  that  the  Fathers  of  Charity,  the  Order  of 
the  great  Italian  Reformer  Antonio  Rosmini,  then  represented  in 
England  by  the  excellent  and  pious  Father  Gentili,  should  open 
THEIR  Order  AT  ONCE  to  the  Oxford  School,  and  adapt  its 
rules  to  their  position  and  antecedents."^ 

Now  this  was,  no  doubt,  a  very  daring  proposal  of  De 
Lisle's.  It  was  nothing  less  than  that  the  Tractarians 
should  at  once  become  Roman  Catholics,  and  thus,  accord- 
ing to  his  scheme  (to  quote  again  his  letter  to  his  wife  on 
May  5th),  they  would  "  come  to  an  understanding  with 
the  Pope  at  once,  that  so  they  might  be  in  active  com- 
munion with  him,  and  yet  remain  in  the  Church  of  England  to 
labour  for  the  reconcihation  of  their  whole  Church."  Mr. 
Edwin  De  Lisle,  himself  a  Roman  Catholic,  who  edited 
Purcell's  Life  of  his  father,  says  : — "  From  the  high  Con- 
tinuity point  of  view,  however,  there  does  not  appear  to  be 
any  valid  reason  why  clergymen  upon  becoming  reconciled 
to  the  Holy  See  should  resign  their  livings.  They  would 
only  be  reverting  to  the  position  of  such  admired  Church- 

^   William  George  IVai-d  and  the  Oxford  Movement,  pp.  190,  191. 


190  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

men  as  Archbishop  Theodore,  Stephen  Langton,  Grosteste, 
Alfred  the  Great,  or  Edward  the  Confessor.  It  would  pro- 
bably be  the  duty  of  their  Bishops  to  deprive  them."  ^  Mr. 
Wilfrid  Ward  says  that  the  scheme  "  resulted  only  in 
opportunities  for  cordial  meetings  between  the  Oxonians 
and  the  friends  of  Mr.  Phillipps  and  Father  Gentili.  The 
idea  itself  met  with  no  encouragement  from  Newman  or 
from  the  responsible  leaders  of  the  party."  ^  It  is  evident  to 
any  one  who  reads  De  Lisle's  Life  that  he,  at  any  rate,  was 
under  the  impression  that  his  scheme  was  approved  by 
some  of  the  responsible  leaders,  though  not  the  most  pro- 
minent of  them.  It  will  be  remembered  that,  on  the  first 
Sunday  of  Lent  in  this  year,  De  Lisle  promised  Bloxam  : 
"  I  hope  myself  to  be  the  means  of  introducing  to  Oxford 
some  foreign  Theologians."  This  Father  Gentili  was  one 
of  them.  Again,  on  May  3rd,  during  his  interview  with 
these  Oxford  conspirators,  De  Lisle  proposed  to  them 
"  that  Father  Rosmini  should  come  to  England  and  visit 
Oxford  with  me,  with  a  view  to  conveying  their  sentiments 
to  the  Pope."  Rosmini,  it  seems,  did  not  go  to  Oxford  at 
that  time,  but  the  representative  of  the  Order  of  which  he 
was  head  (the  Institute  of  Charity),  did  go  to  Oxford,  and 
Mr.  Wilfrid  Ward  shows  him  to  us  as  present  at  "  cordial 
meetings "  between  the  Tractarian  conspirators  and  De 
Lisle.  No  doubt  they  discussed  together  De  Lisle's  pro- 
posal that  this  Roman  Catholic  Order  of  Monks  should 
"open  their  Order  al  once  to  the  Oxford  School."  Ward 
seems  to  have  been  in  no  hurry  to  adopt  the  scheme, 
though  he  certainly  did  not  object  to  it,  for  later  on  in  the 
year  he  wrote  to  De  Lisle,  on  October  28th  : — "All  this 
being  so,  your  kind  communication  about  the  Order  of 
Charity  is  of  less  certain  and  immediate  importance  than  it 
otherwise  might  be  ;  though,  of  course,  it  might  become  of  the 
most  pressing  interest  any  single  day."  ^ 

But,  as  we  have  seen,  the  Oxford  Tractarians  and  Father 
Gentili  were  not  the  only  persons  consulted.     "  Informal 

^  Life  and  Letters  of  Ambrose  Phillipps  de  Lisle,  vol.  i.  p.  284,  note. 
2   Hilliatn  George  Ward  and  the  Oxford  Alovenient,  p.  191. 
*  Ibid.  p.  195. 


WISEMAN'S   VISIT    TO    THE    OXFORD    LEADERS        191 

communications  were  opened  with  Bishop  Wiseman." 
These  were  no  ordinary  schemes  that  were  proposed  to 
him,  but  were  of  a  most  extraordinary  kind.  "  The 
schemes  proposed,"  says  Mr.  W.  Ward,  "  were  Utopian." 
How  did  Wiseman  treat  these  "  Utopian  "  schemes  ?  Did 
he  reject  them  as  monstrous  and  impossible,  as  embodying 
proposals  the  Church  of  Rome  could  never  assent  to  ? 
There  is  nothing  to  show  that  he  acted  in  this  way.  On 
the  contrary,  all  the  evidence  tends  to  prove  that  he  be- 
came a  party  to  the  conspiracy,  and  gave  it  his  active 
assistance.      Mr.  Purcell  slates  that : — 

"In  these  discussions  at  Oxford  Bishop  Wiseman  took  a  lively 
interest.  But  since  his  conversations  with  the  Oxford  men  were  of  a 
confidential  character,  De  Lisle  took  care  in  his  communications  with 
Bishop  Wiseman  not  to  divulge  the  more  intimate  facts  or  names  which 
had  been  given  to  him,  but  gave  a  general  purport  or  otiiline  of  his  inter- 
views. Mn  Bloxam  was  especially  careful  to  warn  De  Lisle  against 
letting  the  fact  be  known  that  they  were  holding  direct  communications  with 
Catholics.  Bishop  Wiseman  was  fully  alive  to  the  value  of  personal 
influence,  from  De  Lisle's  signal  success  with  the  Oxford  Divines, 
and  gladly  accepted  his  offer  of  a  personal  introduction  to  some  of  the 
Oxford  Leaders.  Bishop  Wiseman  had  already  expressed  his  anxious 
desire  to  be  in  communication  with  some  of  the  Oxford  Divines,  but 
as  he  wrote  to  De  Lisle  he  feared  embarrassing  them  by  any  inter- 
course, as,  should  it  be  known,  it  would  be  immediately  thrown  in 
their  faces."  ^ 

De  Lisle  sent  word  to  Bloxam  that  Wiseman  desired 
to  visit  Oxford,  but  Bloxam  was  timid  about  it.  He  said 
that  to  himself  the  visit  of  "  so  learned  and  celebrated  a 
theologian  "  would  be  "  personally  delightful  "  ;  ^  but  he 
thought,  apparently,  that  it  would  scarcely  be  discreet. 
Failing  to  gain  Bloxam's  consent  to  the  proposed  visit, 
De  Lisle  informed  Newman  of  Wiseman's  desire  to  visit 
Oxford  and  to  meet  him  there.  But  Newman's  subtle 
mind  led  him  to  suggest  a  way  out  of  the  difficulty,  which 
is  thus  described  by  Mr.  Purcell :  — "  Newman  having 
a  grave  objection  to  receiving  Catholics  in  the  University, 
especially  a  Catholic  of  such  eminence  as  Bishop  Wise- 

^  Life  and  Letters  of  Ambrose  Fhillipps  de  Lisle,  vol.  i.  p.  260. 
2  Ibid,  p,  261. 


192  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

man,  proposed  meeting  in  the  city  of  Oxford."  ^  Accord- 
ingly it  was  arranged  that  Wiseman  should  visit  Oxford, 
and  there  meet  Newman  ;  not,  however,  in  the  University', 
but  in  the  city !  "  The  meeting  of  two  such  men,"  con- 
tinues Mr.  Purcell,  "  as  the  leader  of  the  Oxford  Move- 
ment and  the  representative  champion  of  the  Catholic 
cause,  was  an  event  which  appealed  to  the  hearts  of  both 
men.  Each  was  frank,  candid,  and  outspoken.  Without, 
however,  entering  into  confidential  relations,  Wiseman 
left  a  favourable  impression  on  Newman's  mind."  2  It 
seems  that  during  this  visit  Wiseman  had  an  interview 
with  Dr.  Pusey.  Writing  to  Lord  Shrewsbury,  on  May 
6th,  De  Lisle  remarks  : — "  I  hope  Bishop  Wiseman  was 
not  rude  in  his  manner  towards  Dr.  Pusey  the  other  day, 
— if  he  was,  he  will  have  done  more  to  keep  hundreds  of 
Anglicans  (I  speak  advisedly)  back  than  all  my  courtesy 
and  charity  towards  them  has  done."  ^ 

But  before  his  visit  to  Oxford  Wiseman  had  sent  to 
Rome  full  particulars  of  what  was  going  on.  Referring 
to  the  end  of  April  1841,  his  biographer  says  that  : — 
"Wiseman's  sanguine  temperament  was  now  fired  with 
hopes  which  those  who  knew  Newman  well  would  not 
have  encouraged.  His  next  plan  was  to  communicate 
further  with  the  Holy  See  through  his  old  friend  Cardinal 
Mai,  and  obtain  instructions  with  a  view  to  a  possibly  imme- 
diate reconciliation  of  Newman  and  his  friends  to  Rome."  "^ 
Earlier  in  the  month  of  April,  on  Good  Friday  (the  9th), 
Wiseman  had  announced  his  intention  of  writing  to  Rome 
on  this  subject.  There  was  no  need  to  write  to  Rome  for 
"  instructions  for  a  possibly  immediate  reconciliation  "  of  the 
Tractarians,  if  that  reconciliation  were  to  be  of  the  ordinary 
kind.  Wiseman  knew  very  well  how  to  receive  perverts 
from  the  Church  of  England  into  the  Church  of  Rome,  and 
required  no  "  instructions  "  on  such  a  very  simple  matter. 
But  we  can  understand  that  he  would  very  much  need 
"  instructions  "  how  to  act  for  "  an  immediate  reconcilia- 

^  Life  and  Letters  of  Ambrose  Phillipps  de  Lisle,  vol.  i.  p.  262. 
'  Ibid.  p.  262.  3  Ibid.  p.  280. 

*  Life  and  Times  of  Cardinal  Wiseman,  vol.  i.  p.  391. 


SECRET   NEGOTIATIONS    WITH    ROME  1 93 

tion"  with  Rome  on  the  Hnes  laid  down  by  De  Lisle  in 
his  letter  to  his  wife.  Only  the  Pope  could  grant  the 
Tractarians  permission  to  be  "  in  active  communion  with 
him,  and  yet  remain  in  the  Church  of  England  to  labour 
for  the  reconciliation  of  their  whole  Church "  ;  only  the 
Pope  could  facilitate  De  Lisle's  proposal  that  the  "Fathers 
of  Charity  "  should  "  open  their  Order  at  once  to  the  Oxford 
School,  and  adapt  its  rules  to  their  position  and  ante- 
cedents." What  else  could  Wiseman  have  had  in  view 
than  some  such  secret  scheme  as  this,  when  he  wrote  as 
follows  to  De  Lisle,  on  Good  Friday  : — 

"  I  feel  that  the  state  of  things  in  England  ought  to  be  made 
known  to  the  Holy  Father.  On  these  grounds  I  have  thought  of 
writing  a  full  account  of  all  that  is  going  forward,  to  one  of  the  dis- 
creetest  members  of  the  S.  College,  Card.  Mai,  with  a  request  that 
he  will  show  what  I  write  to  fio?ie  but  the  Pope.  I  would  not  men- 
tion names  beyond  those  publicly  known,  as  Newman's,  but  would 
even  suppress  his  name,  when  referring  to  what  he  has  privately 
written.  But  I  will  not  send  off  anything  till  I  hear  from  you,  and 
have  your  permission  thus  secretly  to  apply  what  I  know  from  you 
for  the  public  good  in  this  way.  Let  me  know  that  the  Vicegerent 
of  Christ  approves  of  my  course  and  understands  my  motives,  and  I 
shall  not  care  for  all  the  world,  nor  allow  differences  of  opinion  to 
check  my  exertions,"  ^ 

On  May  7th,  only  two  days  after  De  Lisle's  startUng 
letter  to  his  wife,  already  quoted,  Wiseman  wrote  again  to 
him  on  the  same  subject,  and  headed  his  letter,  "  Most 
Confidential "  : — 

"  Your  last  letter  has  indeed  filled  me  with  consolation,  and  sin- 
cere joy.  I  shall  not  fail  in  a  second  letter  to  communicate  its  con- 
tents to  the  Holy  Father  through  Cardinal  Mai.  But  I  foresee  that 
it  will  be  almost  necessary  for  me  during  the  vacation  to  run  to  Rome. 
Indeed,  I  think  it  probable  I  shall  be  desired  to  do  so — as  any 

COMMUNICATION  ON  THE  SUBJECT   IN   QUESTION  IS  TOO  DELICATE   TO 

BE  MADE  OTHERWISE  THAN  ORALLY.  Moreover,  there  are  too  many 
other  matters  on  which  it  would  be  advisable  to  have  a  more  intimate 
communication  with  the  Holy  See,  and  as  for  myself  I  feel  the  serious 

^  Life  and  Times  of  Cai-dinal  Wiseman,  vol.  i.  p.  387. 

N 


194  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

responsibility  of  becoming  (as  I  at  tlie  same  time  earnestly  desire  to 
become)  the  organ  of  intercourse  between  it  and  07ir  Oxford  friends^ 
without  clear  and  distinct  instructions,  such  as  I  feel  cannot  be 
satisfactorily  given  except  on  full  explanations,  and  by  word  of 
MOUTH.  Again  I  should  like  something  to  emanate  from  the  Pope 
towards  encouraging  our  views — recommending  mildness,  prayer, 
calling  on  the  Bishops  for  Reforms,  &c.,  and  particularly  checking  all 
alliance  with  Dissenters.  All  this  I  could  probably  get  done  by 
going  on  the  spot,  but  not  otherwise.  I  have  entered  on  this  matter 
to  ask  you  what  you  think  of  such  a  plan — no  one,  of  course,  must 
know  of  it.  I  would  go  to  Paris,  and  so  on  to  Rome — the  Bishop 
only  knowing  my  plan.  He  is  now  in  London,  so  that  if  you  can 
come  over  I  could  see  you  alone.  I  must  mention  that,  though  I 
have  not  said  anything  to  him  about  your  last  letter,  I  have  found  it 
necessary  to  consult  one  most  prudent  person  under  Confessional 
secrecy,  because  I  find  some  advice  necessary  for  my  own  guidance."  ^ 

Again,  we  may  well  ask  what  could  that  subject  be  (if 
not  secret  reception  into  the  Church  of  Rome)  any  com- 
munication as  to  which  to  Rome  was  "too  delicate  to  be 
made  otherwise  than  orally "  ;  and  on  which  "  distinct 
instructions "  could  only  be  given  satisfactorily  by  the 
"  Holy  See,"  and  "  by  word  of  mouth  "  ?  It  seems  beyond 
doubt,  too,  that  Wiseman  saw  nothing  morally  wrong  in 
such  an  act  of  deception,  for  he  actively  helped  the  scheme 
on  which  De  Lisle  had  at  heart,  and  even  thought  it  pos- 
sible that  the  Pope  would  grant  the  permission  so  earnestly 
desired.  Who,  I  may  well  ask,  can  reasonably  blame 
Protestants,  now  that  so  much  has  been  revealed  by  the 
Romanists  themselves,  for  taking  this  view  of  this  secret 
Conspiracy  to  bring  back  England  to  Rome  by  unworthy 
and  Jesuitical  methods  ?  Of  course  Wiseman  would  have 
preferred  that  these  Tractarian  Divines  should  publicly  join 
the  Church  of  Rome  there  and  then  ;  but  if  they  would 
not  come  over  in  that  open  way,  then  some  other  course 
must  be  adopted.  But  whether  De  Lisle's  plans  were 
actually  sanctioned  at  Rome  is  more  than  we  can  definitely 
say.  If  they  were  adopted,  however,  we  may  be  quite  sure 
that  not  the  slightest  trace  of  it  would  be  permitted  to  find 

^  Life  and  Letters  of  Amb7-ose  de  Lisle,  vol.  i.  p.  255.      Life  and  Times  of 
Cardinal  Wiseman,  vol.  i.  pp.  391,  392. 


SECRET   NEGOTIATIONS    WITH    ROME  1 95 

its  way  into  any  Roman  Catholic  biography  of  the  present 
time.  The  marvel  is  that  so  much  has  been  allowed  to 
come  out  into  the  light  of  day  ;  but  I  have  very  little 
doubt  that  the  authorities  of  the  Papacy  in  England  are 
far  from  pleased  at  the  revelations  made  public  in  the 
Life  and  Letters  of  Ambrose  Phillipps  de  Lisle.  What  has 
appeared  should  certainly  open  the  eyes  of  Englishmen, 
and  make  them  anxious  to  know  what  is  going  on  under- 
neath the  surface  at  the  present  time.  Negotiations  with 
Rome  have  been  going  on,  at  intervals,  ever  since  1841, 
and  for  all  we  know  we  may,  at  the  present  moment,  be 
sleeping  on  the  brink  of  a  volcano,  which  may  burst  forth 
at  any  time,  casting  spiritual  desolation  and  death  around. 
There  were  two  other  prominent  Roman  Catholics  to 
whom  the  secret  proceedings  going  on  at  Oxford  were 
partly  revealed  by  De  Lisle,  viz.,  Lord  Shrewsbury  and 
Cardinal  Acton.  To  the  former  he  wrote  on  May  30, 
1 841,  clearly  revealing  the  Jesuitical  cunning  of  his 
Tractarian  friends : — 

"  I  have  been,"  wrote  De  Lisle,  "  for  some  time  now  engaged  in 
close  correspondence  with  some  of  the  leaders  of  the  Catholic  party 
at  Oxford,  to  which  I  can  only  allude  in  general  terms,  as  it  is 
strictly  confidential ;  it  has,  however,  been  communicated  by  me  to 
our  dear  friend  Bishop  Wiseman  (who  perfectly  concurs  with  me  ifi 
everything)  for  the  purpose  of  being  in  the  strictest  secrecy  forwarded 
to  Cardinal  Mai,  to  be  by  his  Eminence  communicated  to  the  Holy 
Father,  and  to  no  one  else  upon  any  account  whatever.  As  I  said,  I 
cannot  at  present  enter  into  particulars,  but  of  this  you  may  rest 
assured,  that  the  reunion  of  the  Churches  is  certain.  Mr.  Newman 
has  lately  received  the  adhesion  of  several  hundreds  of  the  Clergy  : 
this  is  publicly  known,  and  therefore  I  may  state  it.  Meanwhile  the 
Dissenting  party  is  on  the  alert,  and  though  they  are  by  no  means 
aware  of  the  extent  to  which  things  have  gone,  they  are  apprehensive 
of  something  :  and  as  they  are  joined,  politically  at  least,  by  the  Low 
Church  Party,  we  find  it  necessary  to  blind  them,  the  more  so 
as  we  are  not  ready  to  act  yet,  and  probably  shall  not  be  for  the 
next  three  years  at  earliest.  This  will  account  for  the  great  stress 
still  laid  by  the  Oxford  men  on  practical  abuses  supposed  to  exist  in 
the  communion  of  the  Catholic  Church  :  not  that  I  mean  to  say 
they  do  not  feel  what  they  state  in  reference  to  these  (for  I  know 


196  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

that  even  they  are  moved  by  old  prejudices),  but  feeling  as  they  do, 
they  put  it  forward  more  prominently  perhaps  than  they  otherwise 

would   do,  FOR   THE   PURPOSE    OF   THROWING    DUST    IN    THE    EYES    OF 

THE  Dissenters  and  the  Low  Church  Men. 

"  I  am  very  glad  you  are  coming  back  to  England  next  year.  I 
assure  you,  if  things  go  on  as  I  expect,  you  will  be  wanted  then. 
Meanwhile  I  beseech  you  to  give  us  all  the  assistance  you  can. 
Urge  at  Rome  the  necessity  of  immense  prudence  and  forbearance, 
to  do  everything  to  encourage,  not  to  damp;  not  to  call  upon  these 
men  to  quit  their  own  communion  to  join  ours;  but  to  proceed  on 
courageously  with  their  holy  and  glorious  i?itention  of  reconciling  their 
Church  to  ours ;  remembering  that  this  involves  the  reconciliation 
of  the  Kingdom,  of  the  Aristocracy  with  all  its  wealth  and  power,  of 
the  Nation.  A  false  step  would  spoil  all,  would  produce  a  Protestant 
reaction,  and  would  defeat  the  hopes  of  the  Holy  See  for  another 
century.  Any  use  you  like  to  make  of  this  letter,  you  are  perfectly 
welcome  to  make  :  I  have  said  nothing  that  can  commit  any  itidi- 
vidual ;  and  yet  I  have  said  what  would  have  weight  in  preparing 
men's  minds.  If  you  like  to  read  it  to  the  Father  General  of  the 
Jesuits,  you  can."^ 

In  a  very  long  letter  to  Cardinal  Acton,  dated  "  Feast 
of  the  Conversion,  1842,"  De  Lisle  explained  all  that  had 
gone  on  in  Oxford  down  to  that  time,  then  over  a  year 
after  the  appearance  of  Tract  XC.  He  inforins  the  Cardinal 
that  ''  until  quite  within  the  last  three  weeks,  owing  to  the 
conversions  of  Mr.  Sibthorp  and  others,  the  individuals  I 
allude  to  [the  '  Leaders '  of  the  Oxford  Movement]  felt  it 
both  prudent  and  right  to  suspend  intercourse  for  a  while 
with  either  myself  or  any  other  Catholics,  the  more  so  as 
many  unpleasant  disclosures  had  been  made  in  newspapers?" 
.  .  .  Now,  however,  as  that  intercourse  has  been  renewed 
within  the  last  few  days,  I  may  have  it  in  my  power  to 
give  your  Eminence  some  intelligence  of  a  consoling 
nature."  ^  De  Lisle  proceeds  to  relate  the  steps  the 
Tractarians  had  already  taken  that  ''  so  by  God's  holy 
grace,  she  [Church  of  England]  might  regain  her  ancient 
Catholic  character,"  and  adds  : — "  In  order  to  bring  this 

^  Life  aftd  Letters  of  Ambrose  de  Lisle,  vol.  i.  pp.  217,  218. 
^  No  doubt  De  Lisle  here  refers  to  the  "  disclosures"  made  by  Mr.  Golightly 
in  the  Standard  and  otherwise. 

*  Life  and  Letters  of  Ambrose  de  Lisle,  vol.  i.  p.  231. 


BLINDING    PROTESTANT    EYES  1 97 

about  they  saw  that,  as  an  immense  amount  of  anti- 
Catholic  prejudice  still  existed  in  the  minds  of  the  gene- 
rality of  Englishmen,  it  was  necessary  to  bring  them  on 
by  degrees,  to  communicate  religious  knowledge  to  them  with  a 
holy  reserve;  hence  they  judged  that  the  first  step  was  to 
prove  that  the  English  Church  (however  committed  to 
Protestant  heresy  in  many  respects)  was  not  so  Protestant 
as  the  popular  notion  of  her  implied."  ^  Of  some  of  the 
Tractarians,  De  Lisle  said  that  : — "  Many  again  liked 
Catholic  ideas,  but  could  not  bring  themselves  to  believe 
that  Rome  alone  had  any  true  claim  to  that  glorious  title, 
or  that  their  own  Church  could  only  regain  the  title  by 
reunion  with  that  Church,  which,  as  the  Creed  of  Pius  IV. 
declares,  is  the  Mother  and  Mistress  of  all  other  Churches. 
Those  even  who  saw  this  great  truth  the  most  clearly,  saw 
also  the  danger  of  proclaiming  it  too  openly  as  yet,  lest  the 
public  mind  should  recoil  and  an  anti-Catholic  reaction 
take  place.  Hence,  even  some  of  the  most  advanced  (as 
one  of  them  said  to  me  in  a  letter)  thought  it  right  to  say 
all  they  honestly  could  against  Rome,  in  order  to  blind 

THE    EYES    of    THOSE    WHOM    THEY    SAW    ADVANCING,    but 

yet  in  a  very  weak  state  ;  meaning  too,  when  they  spoke 
against  Rome,  not*  the  Church  of  Rome,  not  the  Council 
of  Trent,  but  certain  popular  notions  or  opinions  existing 
within  the  Church,  and  dwelt  upon  more  or  less  even 
by  her  Divines,  but  yet  not  vouched  for  by  the  Church 
as  such  ;  your  Eminence  may  guess  what  kind  of  notions 
the  individuals  I  allude  to  implied.  Nor  indeed  did 
they  even  mean  to  reprobate  these  popular  notions,  except 
in  a  certain  sense  which  might  be  objectionable.  At 
all  events,  I  know  several  individuals,  who  by  this  gradual 
process  of  the  Oxford  Divines  have  been  brought  to 
the  very  threshold  of  truth,  and  have  even  crossed  her 
borders."  ^  In  conclusion,  De  Lisle  asserted  that : — 
"The  devotion  of  the  glorious  Mother  of  God  is  rapidly 
increasing,  great  numbers  of  the  Anglicans  now  keep 
her  blessed  picture  with  extreme  reverence,  putting 
flowers  before  it,  especially  on  her  principal  feasts,  many 

^  Life  and  Letters  of  Ambrose  de  Lisle,  vol.  i.  p.  232.  ^  Ibid,  p.  233. 


198  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

recite  her  Little  Office ;  a  Fellow  of  Exeter  College  at 
Oxford  burst  into  tears  when  speaking  of  this  Dear 
Mother  of  our  Saviour.  I  am  confident  that  next  to 
Jesus  they  love  her  above  all  things.  Then  they  fast  most 
wonderfully,  like  the  Fathers  of  the  Desert ;  they  take  the 
Discipline  ;  lie  upon  hard  boards  at  night ;  rise  at  midnight 
to  recite  Matins  and  Lauds  ;  spend  whole  hours  in  mental 
prayer  ;  shed  floods  of  tears  over  their  poor  fallen  Mother, 
the  Church  of  England,  earnestly  imploring  of  our  Lord 
to  restore  her,  and  so  their  country,  to  Catholic  Unity."  ^ 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  news  conveyed  to 
Rome  by  Wiseman  and  De  Lisle  filled  the  Vatican  with 
joy,  and  taxed  the  resources  of  the  Jesuits  to  the  utter- 
most. It  is  true  that  De  Lisle  was  unreasonably  hopeful ; 
like  most  enthusiasts  he  expected  great  things,  and  ex- 
pected them  almost  at  once.  Probably  he  felt  disappointed 
at  first ;  yet  when,  in  his  old  age,  he  looked  at  the  state 
of  the  Church  of  England  and  the  progress  in  it  of  Roman 
ritual  and  Roman  doctrine,  he  must  have  felt  that  he  had 
not  laboured  in  vain.  The  wonder  is  that  one  who,  in 
ordinary  private  life,  would  scorn  to  act  otherwise  than 
as  a  honourable  English  gentleman,  could,  when  he  had 
to  deal  with  religion,  become  a  party  to  such  unworthy  and 
crooked  conduct  as  that  exposed  in  his  own  biography. 
And  what  must  we  think  of  the  cause  which  needed  such 
assistance  ?  De  Lisle  did  not  act  alone.  It  was  his 
boast,  as  we  have  seen,  that  "  Bishop  Wiseman  perfectly 
concurs  with  me  in  everything  ; "  and  there  is  no  evidence 
to  show  that  the  Pope  ever  censured  either  the  one  or  the 
other  for  their  double  dealing  ;  and  yet  the  Pope  was 
made  fully  acquainted  with  what  they  were  doing.  Later 
on,  when  Newman  was  a  Roman  priest,  he  saw  clearly 
the  advantage  to  be  gained  by  Rome  through  the  adop- 
tion of  one  portion  of  De  Lisle's  policy,  when,  on  July 
I,  1857,  he  wrote  to  De  Lisle:  "I  perfectly  agree  with 
you  in  thinking  that  the  Movement  of  1833  is  not  over 
in  the  country,  whatever  be  the  state  of  Oxford  itself ; 
also,   I  think  it  is  for  the  interest  of  Catholicism  that  in- 

^  Life  and  Letters  of  Ambrose  de  Lisle,  vol.  i.  p.  237. 


A   TRAITOR    WITHIN   THE    CAMP  199 

dividuals  should  not  join  us,  but  should  remain  to  leaven 
the  mass — I  mean  that  they  ivill  do  more  for  us  by  remaining 
where  they  are  than  by  coming  over."  ^  At  the  same  time 
Newman  felt  that  there  was  danger  to  the  individual  who 
adopted  such  a  policy,  although  the  Roman  Church  would 
be  a  gainer  by  it  ;  for  he  added  :  "  But  then,  they  have 
individual  souls,  and  with  what  heart  can  I  do  anything 
to  induce  them  to  preach  to  others,  if  they  themselves 
thereby  become  castaways  ?  " 

The  Rev.  W.  G.  Ward  certainly  acted  for  a  time  on 
this  policy  of  aiding  the  Roman  Church  by  staying 
within  the  Church  of  England,  with  a  view  to  bringing 
her  back  to  unity  with  Rome.  His  son  says  of  him 
that,  while  he  was  a  clergyman  of  the  Church  of  England  : 

"He  had  long  held  that  the  Roman  Church  was  the  one  true 
Church.  He  had  gradually  come  to  believe  that  the  English 
Church  was  not  strictly  a  part  of  the  Church  at  all.  He  had  felt 
bound  to  retain  his  external  communion  with  her  members,  because 
he  believed  that  he  was  brifiging  many  of  them  towards  Rome; 
and  to  unite  himself  to  the  Church  which  he  loved  and  trusted, 
to  enjoy  the  blessings  of  external  communion  for  himself,  if  by  so 
doing  he  thwarted  this  larger  and  fuller  victory  of  truth,  had  seemed 
a  course  both  indefensible  and  selfish. 

"  Still,  he  had  long  looked  on  his  present  position  as  only  a 
time  of  waiting,  as  a  season  of  Purgatory,  as  the  painful  and 
laborious  seed-sowing,  endured  patiently  because  of  the  harvest  to 
come.  It  was  years  since  he  had  written  that  restoration  of  com- 
munion with  the  one  Catholic  Church  and  the  See  of  Peter  was 
'the  most  enchanting  earthly  prospect  on  which  his  imagination 
could  dwell.'  He  had  become  accustomed  to  a  position  similar  to 
that  of  the  missionary,  who  foregoes  the  happiness  of  living  among 
his  brethren  in  the  faith,  often  of  approaching  the  Sacraments,  of 
the  sustaining  and  health-giving  presence  of  Church  Liturgy  and 
ordinances,  in  order  that  he  may  lead  strangers  to  see  the  truth, 
and  to  enjoy  eventually  in  his  company  those  helps  and  blessings 
which  he  foregoes  for  the  moment  for  their  sakes."  ^ 

Is  it  unreasonable  to  fear  that  at  the  present  hour 
there  may  be  a  very  large  number  of  Ritualistic  clergy  in 
the  Church  of  England  acting  on  the  very  same  principle 

1  Life  and  Letters  of  At?ib>vse  de  Lisle,  vol.  i.  p.  368. 

^  William  George  Ward  and  the  Oxford  Movement,  pp.  356,  357. 


200  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

which  kept  Ward  for  some  years  within  the  Church  of 
England  ?  He  was  for  a  time  the  leader  of  the  more 
advanced  Romanisers,  and  their  conduct,  it  seems,  was 
quite  as  bad  as  his.  Of  these  men  Mr.  Wilfrid  Ward 
writes : — 

"Roman  doctrine  was  more  and  more  fully  accepted,  until  in 
Mr.  Ward's  work,  The  Ideal  of  a  Christian  Church,  Rome  was 
practically  acknowledged  as  the  Divinely  appointed  guardian  and 
teacher  of  religious  truth.  Finall}',  the  old  idea  of  working  towards 
the  Reunion  of  Churches,  and  calling  for  concessions  on  both  sides 
with  a  view  to  this  object,  disappeared.  The  Pope  was  maintained 
to  be  normally  Primate  of  Christendom,  and  the  ultimate  aim 

PROPOSED  FOR  THE  ENGLISH  ChURCH  WAS  NOT  REUNION  WITH  BUT 
SUBMISSION  TO  ROME. 

"  On  what  ground  then  did  the  men  who  held  this  theory  justify 
their  remaining  in  the  Church  of  England?  On  the  ground  (i)  that 
Providence  had  placed  them  in  it;  (2)  that  its  formularies  were  so 
loose  as  to  allow  the  holding  of  all  Roman  doctrine  within  its  pale ; 
(3)  that  the  sudden  adoption  of  doctrines  new  to  the  moral  nature 
was  difficult  and  undesirable,  and  that  the  English  Church  afforded 
a  good  position  for  gradually  drawing  nearer  to  Rome,  until  some 
considerable  portion  of  Churchmen  should  have  so  far  imbibed  the 
spirit  of  Roman  Catholicism,  as  to  feel  conscientiously  impelled  to 
outward  conformity  to  its  communion.  For  an  individual  to  move 
prematurely  might  destroy  this  prospect ;  and,  therefore,  he  was  to 
be,  for  the  present,  content  with  vnititig  hi?nself  in  spirit  to  the  Ratian 
Church,  without  formally  joinitig  her.  So  long  as  conscience  did 
not  clearly  call  upon  him  to  take  the  further  step,  so  long  might  he 
hope  that  he  was  not  cut  off  from  grace  by  remaining  where  Pro- 
vidence had  placed  him."  ^ 

Of  course,  this  advanced  section  of  Romanisers  went 
beyond  Pusey  and  Keble  in  a  Romeward  direction,  and 
therefore  I  do  not  accuse  them  of  complicity  with  their 
work,  though  I  may  mention  that  of  Keble  it  is  recorded 
by  one  of  his  biographers  that,  on  May  14,  1843,  he 
wrote  to  Newman  : — "  Certainly  there  is  a  great  yearning 
even  after  Rome  in  many  parts  of  the  Church,  which 
seems  to  be  accompanied  by  so  much  good  that  one  hopes 
if  it  be  right  it  will  be  allowed  to  gain  strength."  ^ 

1    Willi afu  George  Ward  and  the  Oxford  Movement,  p.  212. 
^  fohn  Keble.     By  Walter  Lock,  M.A.,  p.  120. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

The  Jerusalem  Bishopric — Chevaher  Bunsen's  mission  to  England — 
Puseyite  opposition — Hope-Scott's  objections — Dr.  Hook  supports 
the  Bishopric — His  description  of  the  Romanisers — Pusey's  Letter 
to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury — Lord  Ashley's  letter  to  Pusey — 
Mr.  Gladstone  supports  the  Bishopric — Newman  and  the  Jerusalem 
Bishopric — He  thinks  it  "atrocious"  and  "hideous" — His  Protest — 
Contest  for  Professorship  of  Poetry — Isaac  Williams  and  Reserve  in 
Com?im?!i eating  Religious  Knowledge — Extracts  from  his  writings — 
Mr.  Garbett,  the  Protestant  candidate — Samuel  Wilberforce  on  the 
contest— He  denounces  the  Romanisers — Success  of  the  Protestant 
candidate — Secessions  to  Rome — The  Rev.  F.  W.  Faber — His  visit 
to  the  Continent— His  Sights  and  Thoughts  in  Foreign  Churches — 
How  he  deceived  the  public — The  Rev.  William  Goode — His  Pro- 
testant works — His  Case  as  It  Is — His  Divine  Rule  of  Faith  and 
Practice — Bishop  Bagot's  Visitation  Charge — Mr.  Goode  answers  it 
— The  Parker  Society. 

Another  heated  controversy  arose  in  1841  in  connection 
with  the  establishment  of  the  Jerusalem  Bishopric.  The 
first  step  towards  the  formation  of  this  Bishopric  was 
taken  by  the  King  of  Prussia,  who  was  sincerely  and 
earnestly  anxious  to  secure  for  Protestants  of  all  de- 
nominations, residing  in  Palestine,  that  protection  in  the 
exercise  of  their  religious  duties  which  at  that  time  was 
greatly  needed.  Besides  this  his  Majesty  was  most 
desirous  of  promoting  the  unity  of  true  Protestants  of 
all  Evangelical  denominations,  a  unity  which  he  felt  would 
be  greatly  promoted  by  the  foundation  of  an  Anglican 
Bishopric  in  Jerusalem.  Having  carefully  considered  the 
question  the  King  decided  on  sending  Chevalier  Bunsen 
to  London,  for  the  purpose  of  negotiating  with  the  British 
Government,  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  the 
Bishop  of  London,  with  a  view  to  the  carrying  out  of  his 
beneficent  plans.  Bunsen  was  instructed  by  his  Royal 
Master  to  ascertain  : — '•'  How  far  the  Church  of  England, 


202  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

which  is  already  possessed  of  a  Minister's  residence  on 
Mount  Zion,  and  has  begun  to  build  a  Church  on  the 
spot,  would  be  inclined  to  grant  the  Evangelical  National 
Church  of  Prussia  rank,  as  a  sister-Church,  in  the  Holy 
Land  ?  "  ^  If  the  request  of  the  King  were  granted,  he 
would  do  all  in  his  power  to  assist  the  Bishopric.  "  Nor 
will  his  Majesty,"  he  said  in  his  "  Instructions  "  to  Cheva- 
lier Bunsen,  "  impelled  by  a  feeling  of  Apostolical  Catho- 
licity, and  expectant  of  a  reciprocal  feeling  on  the  part  of 
the  Church  of  England,  refrain  from  expressing  his  readi- 
ness to  allow  all  the  clergy  and  missionaries  of  his  native 
Church,  in  every  land  of  Missions  where  the  Church  of 
England  has  an  Episcopate,  to  unite  with  it ;  even  to  the 
seeking,  if  needful,  of  that  Episcopal  ordination,  which 
the  Church  of  England  requires  for  admission  to  the 
priestly  office.  And  his  Majesty  will  provide  that  such 
ordination  be  duly  recognised  and  respected  in  his  own 
dominions."  ^ 

On  arriving  in  England,  Bunsen  found  the  authorities 
in  Church  and  State  generally  favourable  to  the  King's 
proposals,  which  were  heartily  approved  by  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury  (Dr.  Howley),  and  the  Bishop  of 
London  (Dr.  Blomfield).  The  scheme  was  taken  up  very 
warmly  by  Evangelical  Churchmen,  Lord  Ashley  (after- 
wards Earl  of  Shaftesbury)  taking  the  lead  in  removing 
all  difficulties  in  the  way,  and  furthering  the  scheme  to 
the  utmost.  Within  five  days  of  his  arrival  in  London 
Bunsen  called  on  Lord  Ashley,  who  thus  recorded  his 
visit  in  his  diary  : — "  June  24th.  My  friend  Bunsen  has 
just  called,  and  has  brought  me  a  most  honourable  and 
gratifying  message  from  the  King  of  Prussia.  May  the 
blessing  of  God's  saints  of  old,  of  David,  and  of  Hezekiah, 
be  on  him  and  his  for  ever  !  But  all  things  are  now  won- 
derful. The  mission  of  Bunsen  is  a  wonder."  ^  Lord 
Ashley  arranged  a  meeting  between  Bunsen  and  Peel. 
From  Lord  Palmerston  Bunsen  received  every  encourage- 

^  Thejertisalem  Bishopric  Doaimenis.     By  the  Rev.  Professor  W.  H.  Hechler. 
London  :  1883.     Part  II.  p.  2. 
^  Ibid.  p.  12. 
8  Life  of  Lord  Shaftesbury,  popular  edition,  p.  199. 


THE    JERUSALEM    BISHOPRIC  203 

ment.  "  Palmerston,"  wrote  Lord  Ashley,  "  went  forward 
with  the  zeal  of  an  Apostle,  did  in  three  weeks  what  at 
another  time,  or,  as  it  seems,  under  any  influence  but 
mine,  he  would  not  have  listened  to  in  twelve  months, 
fanned  the  weak  embers  of  willing  but  timid  spirit  in  the 
Bishops,  and  made  that  to  be  necessary  and  irrevocable 
which  his  successors  would  have  thought  the  attribute  of 
a  maniac,  even  in  imagination."  ^  Before,  however,  the 
Jerusalem  Bishopric  could  be  founded,  it  was  necessary 
to  pass  a  special  Act  of  Parliament  to  legalise  it.  Special 
facilities  were  offered  for  this  purpose,  with  the  result  that 
the  Bill  speedily  passed  through  both  Houses  of  Par- 
liament, received  the  Royal  assent  early  in  October,  and 
is  now  known  as  the  Jerusalem  Bishopric  Act  (5  Vic- 
toria, chap,  vi.),  though  the  word  Jerusalem  is  not  once 
mentioned  in  it.  One  half  of  the  money  necessary  for 
endowing  the  Bishopric  was  supplied  by  the  King  of 
Prussia  ;  the  other  half  was  subscribed  in  England,  the 
London  Society  for  Promoting  Christianity  amongst  the 
Jews  giving  ^^3000.  From  a  Statement  of  Proceedings  issued 
at  the  end  of  1841,  and  "Published  by  Authority,"  we 
learn  that  the  Archbishop  "  first  consulted  the  Bishops " 
about  the  scheme  for  a  Bishopric.  "  Its  ultimate  results 
cannot  be  with  certainty  predicted  ;  but  we  may  reason- 
ably hope  that,  under  the  Divine  blessing,  it  may  lead  the 
way  to  an  essential  unity  of  discipline,  as  well  as  of  doc- 
trine, between  our  own  Church  and  the  less  perfectly 
constituted  of  the  Protestant  Churches  of  Europe,  and 
that,  too,  not  by  the  way  of  Rome  ;  while  it  may  be  the 
means  of  establishing  relations  of  unity  between  the 
United  Church  of  England  and  Ireland  and  the  ancient 
Churches  of  the  East,  strengthening  them  against  the  en- 
croachments of  the  See  of  Rome,  and  preparing  the  way 
for  their  purification,  in  some  cases  from  serious  errors."  ^ 
The  Bishop  of  Jerusalem,  continued  the  Statement,  "  is 
specially  charged  not  to  entrench  upon  the  spiritual  rights 

^  Life  of  Lord  Shaftisbiiry,  p.  200. 

^  State7)ieiit  of  Proceedings  Relatifig  to  the  Establislwient  of  a  Bishopric  in 
Jerusalem.     Published  by  Authority,  p.  5,     London  :  Rivingtons.     1841. 


2  04  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

and  liberties  of  those  Churches  [of  the  East]  ;  but  to  con- 
fine himself  to  the  care  of  those  over  whom  they  cannot 
rightly  claim  any  jurisdiction.  .  .  .  The  Bishop  of  the 
United  Church  of  England  and  Ireland  at  Jerusalem  is  to 
be  nominated  alternately  by  the  Crowns  of  England  and 
Prussia,  the  Archbishop  having  the  absolute  right  of  veto, 
with  respect  to  those  nominated  by  the  Prussian  Crown."  ^ 
The  Statement  continues  : — 

"  Congregations,  consisting  of  Protestants  of  the  German  tongue, 
residing  within  the  limits  of  the  Bishop's  jurisdiction,  and  willing  to 
submit  to  it,  will  be  under  the  care  of  German  clergymen  ordained 
by  him  for  that  purpose ;  who  will  officiate  in  the  German  language, 
according  to  the  forms  of  their  National  Liturgy,  compiled  from  the 
Ancient  Liturgies,  agreeing  in  all  points  of  doctrine  with  the  Liturgy 
of  the  English  Church,  and  sanctioned  by  the  Bishop  with  consent 
of  the  Metropolitan,  for  the  special  use  of  those  congregations  ;  such 
Liturgy  to  be  used  in  the  German  language  only.  Germans,  intended 
for  the  charge  of  such  congregations,  are  to  be  ordained  according 
to  the  Ritual  of  the  English  Church,  and  to  sign  the  Articles  of  that 
Church ;  and,  in  order  that  they  may  not  be  disqualified  by  the  laws 
of  Germany  from  officiating  to  German  congregations,  they  are,  be- 
fore ordination,  to  exhibit  to  the  Bishop  a  certificate  of  their  having 
subscribed,  before  some  competent  authority,  the  Confession  of 
Augsburg."  2 

The  clergyman  selected  to  be  the  first  Protestant 
Bishop  of  Jerusalem  was  the  Rev.  M.  S.  Alexander,  D.D. 
The  Queen's  mandate  for  his  consecration  was  dated  Nov- 
ember 6,  1 841,  and  he  was  consecrated  on  November  7th 
by  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  assisted  by  the  Bishops 
of  London,  Rochester,  and  New  Zealand. 

The  Jerusalem  Bishopric  was  thus  founded,  with  the 
approbation  of  the  overwhelming  majority  of  English 
Churchmen.     But  some  there  were  who  murmured. 

"But  oh  !"  wrote  Lord  Ashley,  in  his  diary  for  October  12th, 
"the  monstrosities  of  Puseyism  1  The  Bishop  of  London  is  beset, 
and  half  brow-beaten,  by  the  clamorous  and  uncatholic  race.  He 
showed  Bunsen  to-day  a  letter  from  Dr.  Pusey  beginning : — '  It  is 

^  Statement  of  Proceedings  Relating  to  the    Establishment  of  a  Bishopric  in 
Jerusalem,  p.  6. 
2  Ibid.  p.  8. 


TRACTARIAN    OPPOSITION    TO    THE    BISHOPRIC        205 

now  for  the  first  time  that  the  Church  of  England  holds  communica- 
tion with  those  who  are  without  the  Church ! '  This  is  the  holy, 
Christian,  Catholic  way  in  which  he  speaks  of  all  the  congrega- 
tions of  Protestant  Germany.  Towards  the  end  he  adds  : — '  The 
Church  of  England  will  thus  be  the  protectress  of  all  Protestant 
communions.'  What  can  be  so  dreadful  ?  The  Puseyite  object  is 
this,  '  to  effect  reconciliation  with  Rome  ' ;  ours,  with  Protestantism ; 
they  wish  to  exalt  Apostolical  Succession  so  high  as  to  make  it  para- 
mount to  all  moral  purity,  and  all  doctrinal  truth ;  we,  to  respect  it 
so  as  to  shift  it  from  Abiathar  to  Zadok."  ^ 

The  Jerusalem  Bishopric  controversy  naturally  produced 
a  pamphlet  war.  Mr.  James  R.  Hope  (afterwards  known 
as  Hope-Scott),  Chancellor  of  the  Diocese  of  Salisbury,  a 
prominent  Tractarian,  and  an  intimate  friend  of  Newman 
and  Mr.  Gladstone,  was  greatly  disturbed  by  what  had 
taken  place.  It  shook  his  faith  in  the  Church  of  England, 
and  prepared  the  way  for  his  secession  to  Rome  a  few 
years  later.  He  relieved  his  feelings  by  private  corre- 
spondence with  both  Newman  and  Gladstone,  and  at  last, 
at  the  close  of  the  year,  published  a  pamphlet  on  the  sub- 
ject in  the  form  of  a  Letter  to  a  Friend.  In  this  document 
Mr.  Hope  candidly  mdicated  his  chief  objection  to  the 
Bishopric.  "Above  all,"  he  said,  "we  are  bound  not  to 
insult  those  Bishops  [in  Jerusalem]  through  whose  suffer- 
ance our  Church  there  is  to  exist,  by  pretending  to  recog- 
nise and  participate  in  their  Catholicity,  and  at  the  same 
time  by  professing  religious  identity  with  Calvinism  or 
Lutheranism,  both  of  which  they  have  by  name  (Synod  of 
Jerusalem  in  1675),  condemned  and  rejected."^  His  dis- 
like of  the  Bishopric  was  still  more  clearly  revealed  in  the 
following  passage  : — 

"  And  if,  on  the  other  hand,  it  should  be  determined  in  law  that 
Bishop  Alexander  is  not  subject  to  the  English  Metropolitan,  or 
governed  in  his  Diocese  by  the  constitution  of  the  English  Church  \ 
or  if,  before  a  legal  decision  can  be  obtained,  it  should  be  publicly 
proclaimed  from  authority  in  this  country  that  such  is  the  basis  of 
the  new  Bishopric,  then  it  will  be  at  once  evident  that,  whatever 

^  Life  of  Lord  Shaftesbury,  p.  201. 

^  The  Bishopric  of  the  United  Church  of  England  and  Ireland  at  Jerusalem. 
By  James  R.  Hope,  B.C.L.,  ist  edition,  p.  45. 


2  06  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

title  may  have  been  given  to  Bishop  Alexander,  he  can  in  no  real 
sense  be  a  Bishop  of  our  Church,  nor  can  his  acts  in  any  way  impli- 
cate us,  or  affect  our  credit  in  the  face  of  Christendom.  He  must 
then  be  held  to  be  an  independent  Bishop,  not  in  connection  with 
any  Catholic  body — a  fragment  struck  off  from  the  Rock  of  the 
Church,  Into  the  communion  of  such  a  Bishop  no  orthodox 
Churchman  abroad  will  enter,  no  orthodox  clergyman  will  submit  to 
his  jurisdiction  ;  his  orders  will  not  be  received  in  England ;  the 
marriages  and  other  rites  solemnised  by  his  clergy  will  be  open  to 
serious  doubts  in  our  Ecclesiastical  Courts ;  and  that  these  things 
may  not  be  hid  from  the  world,  it  will  (as  I  conceive)  be  the 
wisdom,  if  not  the  duty,  of  the  sister  Churches  in  England,  Ireland, 
Scotland,  the  Colonies,  and  America,  to  proclaim  at  once  and  aloud 
their  repudiation  of  a  Prelate,  who  will  have  professed  openly  his 
design  to  reject  the  order  of  the  Church  which  gave  him  mission, 
and  whose  title  and  privileges  he  assumes."  ^ 

No  doubt  this  is  exactly  what  Mr.  Hope  and  his  friends 
would  have  liked  to  have  happened.  Yet  they  dared  not 
attempt  to  bring  about  such  a  repudiation  of  Bishop 
Alexander  by  an  action  in  the  Courts  such  as  was  hinted 
at  in  Mr.  Hope's  pamphlet.  This  document  was  answered 
by  the  well-known  Broad  Churchman,  the  Rev.  F.  D. 
Maurice,  who  declared  that : — "  It  would  have  been  a  sin 
in  the  Bishops  of  our  Church  to  let  these  canonical  obli- 
gations hinder  them  from  embracing  an  opportunity,  not 
sought  for  by  them,  but  offering  itself  to  them  unexpect- 
edly, of  promoting  Catholic  unity,  and  advancing  Catholic 
principles.  And  that  it  will  be  a  sin  in  us,  if  we  allow  these 
canonical  objections,  supposing  no  higher  and  stronger 
reasons  can  be  produced,  to  hinder  us  from  giving  God 
thanks  for  what  has  been  done,  and  from  labouring,  so  far 
as  in  us  lies,  that  it  may  not  have  been  done  in  vain."  ^ 

Several  very  decided  High  Churchmen  gave  their  help 
to  the  Jerusalem  Bishopric.  Dr.  Hook,  Vicar  of  Leeds, 
actually  subscribed  to  the  Bishopric  Fund.  No  modern 
Ritualist  can  point  the  finger  of  scorn  at  Hook,  and  call 
him  an  ultra-Protestant.      It  was  he  who,  as  far  back  as 

^  Hope's  The  Bishopric  of  the  United  Church  of  England  and  Ireland  at 
Jerusalem,  pp.  55,  56. 

-  Three  Letters  to  the  Rev.  IV.  Palmer.  By  F,  D.  Maurice,  A.M.,  Professor 
of  English  Literature  at  King's  College,  London,  p.  89.     London  :  1842. 


DR.    HOOK    ON    THE    ROMANISERS  207 

1835,  declared  that,  in  his  opinion,  ''the  danger  now  is, 
not  from  Popery,  but  from  that  snare  of  Satan,  ultra- 
Protestantism "  ;^  and  who,  in  1840,  writing  to  a  friend, 
declared  : — "  I  for  one  think  that  a  Romanist  is  far  less  in 
error  than  Owen  and  Baxter."  ^  Yet  even  Dr.  Hook  wrote 
a  pamphlet  defending  the  Jerusalem  Bishopric  against  the 
narrow-minded  and  bigoted  views  of  his  more  advanced 
friends.  In  the  commencement  of  this  pamphlet  Dr. 
Hook  sorrowfully  acknowledged  that : — 

"  There  are,  certainly,  many  suchpersofis  among  our  younger  breth- 
ren at  the  present  time,  who  are  inclined  to  look  upon  our  Church  in 
the  following  light : — they  regard  the  Church  of  England  as  a  Branch 
of  the  Catholic  Church  from  which,  without  peril  to  their  souls,  they 
may  not  secede  ;  but  they  look  upon  it  as  injured  rather  than  improved 
by  the  Reformation  ;  they  think  that  if  some  abuses  were  corrected, 
serious  errors  were  introduced ;  they  agree  with  the  Romanists  in  main- 
taining that  the  Reformation  was  unnecessary,  at  all  events,  to  the  extent 
to  which  it  was  carried  ;  and  that  it  was  conducted  in  a  manner  not  to 
be  defended  upon  Catholic  principles.  The  conclusion  which  must 
inevitably  be  deduced  from  these  premises  is  this,  that  the  Church 
of  England,  as  at  present  constituted,  is  not  the  -model  according  to 
which  other  Churches  are  to  be  reformed  ;  and  that  we  have  as  much 
to  learn  from  Rome  as  Rome  has  to  learn  from  us.  I  believe  that  in 
this  statement  I  have  clearly  asserted  an  opinion  very  extensively 
held  upon  this  subject.     From  this  opinion  I  do  entirely  dissent."  ^ 

No  wonder  that  those,  who  so  "  very  extensively  held  " 
these  unworthy  views  of  the  English  Church,  were  bitterly 
opposed  to  any  approach  on  her  part  towards  union  with 
non-Episcopal  Protestant  Churches  on  the  Continent.  As 
to  the  Jerusalem  Bishopric  Hook  said : — 

"The  fact  of  our  placing  a  Bishop  of  our  own  Church  in 
Jerusalem,  not  as  an  usurper  of  another  Bishop's  jurisdiction,  but 
as  a  representative  of  the  English  Church,  in  a  land  where  such 
conduct  is  tolerated  with  respect  to  other  branches  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  to  discharge  the  ministerial  office  for  those  who  cannot  be 
received  into  communion  with  the  Oriental  Church,  and  to  watch 
over  the  intrigues  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  which  certainly  can  have 

^  Life  of  Dean  Hook,  vol.  i.  p.  274. 
^  Ibid.  vol.  ii.  p.  59. 

^  Reasons  for  Contributing    Toivards   the  Support  of  an  English  Bishop  at 
Jerusalem.     By  Walter  F.  Hook,  D.D.,  p.  3.     London  :  1842. 


208  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

no  more  right  to  have  a  representative  at  Jerusalem  than  w^e  have; 
all  this  cannot  have  a  tendency,  as  you  seem  to  think,  to  continue 
the  division  which  unhappily  exists  in  the  Catholic  Church."  ^ 

Dr.  Pusey  was  at  first,  through  conversations  with 
Bunsen,  favourable  to  the  proposed  Bishopric  at  Jeru- 
salem. But  later  on,  mainly  through  the  influence  of 
Newman,  he  altered  his  mind,  and  became  an  opponent. 
At  this  period  he  was  very  much  troubled  by  the  contro- 
versy which  had  arisen  in  connection  with  Tract  XC,  the 
Episcopal  charges  against  it,  and  the  accusations  of  a  tend- 
ency to  Romanism  which  had  been  brought  against  the 
Tractarians.  He  determined,  therefore,  to  publish  a  kind 
of  apology  for  his  friends,  in  which  he  tried  to  minimise 
to  the  utmost  the  censures  of  the  Bishops,  and  at  the 
same  time  he  availed  himself  of  the  opportunity  to  deal 
with  the  Jerusalem  Bishopric  question.  He  did  this  in 
the  form  of  A  Letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  which 
filled  a  pamphlet  of  171  pages.  With  the  earlier  portion 
of  this  document  I  have  here  no  special  concern,  except 
to  call  attention  to  the  following  remarkable  statement, 
which  deserves  to  be  more  widely  known  than  it  is  at 
the  present  day  : — 

"  Two  schemes  of  doctrines,"  wrote  Dr.  Pusey,  "  the  Genevan 
and  the  Catholic,  are,  probably  for  the  last  time,  struggling  within 
our  Church ;  the  contest,  which  has  been  carried  on  ever  since  the 
Reformation,  between  the  Church  and  those  who  parted  from  her, 
has  now  been  permitted  to  be  transferred  to  the  Church  herself; 
on  the  issue  hangs  the  destiny  of  our  Church  ;  if  human  frailty  or 
impatience  precipitates  not  that  issue,  all  will  be  well,  and  it  will 
have  a  peaceful  close ;  yet  a  decisive  issue  it  must  have  ;  the  one  must 
in  time  absorb  the  other  ;  or,  to  speak  more  plainly,  the  Catholic,  as 
the  full  truth  of  God,  must,  unless  it  be  violently  cast  out,  in  time 
leaven  and  absorb  into  itself  whatever  is  partial  and  defective ;  as  it 
has  already  very  extensively."  ^ 

Translated  into  plainer  language,  "  Genevan "  meant, 
in  Pusey's  mind,  decided  Protestantism  ;  while  '*  Catholic  " 

1  Hook's  Reasons  for  Contributing  Towards  the  Support  of  an  English 
Bishop  at  Jerusalem,  p.    1 1. 

2  A  Letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  on  Some  Circumstances  Con- 
nected with  the  P)-esent  Crisis  in  the  English  Church.  By  the  Rev.  E.  B. 
Pusey,  D.D.,  pp.   84,  85.     Oxford  :  1842. 


THE    "DECISIVE    ISSUE"  209 

meant  that  imitation  of  a  great  deal  of  Popery  with  which 
his  name  is  associated.  It  is  evident  from  the  above 
quotation  that  he  foresaw  that  "  a  decisive  issue  "  between 
Protestantism  and  sham  Popery  must  eventually  come ; 
but  he  dreaded  lest  by  "  human  frailty  or  impatience " 
it  should  come  too  soon,  for  then  his  party  might  expect 
to  "be  violently  cast  out."  But  one  thing  he  felt  was 
certain — and  in  this^  I  agree  with  him — sooner  or  later 
one  or  other  of  the  two  systems  of  religion,  the  Protestant 
or  the  Sacerdotal,  must  cease  to  exist  in  the  Church  of 
England.  That  is  really  the  issue  before  the  country  in 
the  present  Ritual  Crisis.  Unless  the  Romanising  lion  be 
"  cast  out,"  it  will  "  absorb "  the  Evangehcal  lamb,  and 
that  means  death  to  the  lamb.  We  are  engaged  in  a 
struggle  of  life  or  death.  The  issue  will  be,  either  that 
the  Protestant  Reformation  shall  be  utterly  undone,  and 
the  Church  go  back  to  her  condition  in  the  Dark  Ages  ; 
or  we  must  go  forward  in  Gospel  and  Protestant  light, 
until  "  light  shall  conquer  darkness,"  and  England's 
Church  shall  once  more  be  the  greatest  bulwark  against 
Popery  to  be  found  in  the  world.  We  are  looking  for- 
ward to  times  of  war,  not  of  peace.  We  need  brave  men 
now,  men  who  will  love  the  glorious  Gospel  brought  back 
again  to  life  at  the  Reformation,  more  than  ease,  or 
friends,  or  life. 

As  to  the  Jerusalem  Bishopric  Pusey  threatened  the 
Archbishop  in  these  words  : — "  But  any  step  which  has 
a  tendency  to  bring  her  [the  Church  of  England]  into 
relations  with  foreign  un-CathoHc  bodies,  will  be  unset- 
tling. Any  advance  to  Protestantism  will  produce  a 
counter-movement  towards  Romanism."  ^  He  expressed 
a  fear  lest  attempts  should  be  made  to  convert  people 
from  the  Eastern  Church.  To  act  in  this  way  he  actually 
declared  would  be  "  encouraging  sin,"  "  though  he  must 
have  known  that  that  Church  was  steeped  in  doctrinal 
corruption  and  superstition.      He  had  no  objection  to  the 

^  Pusey's  Letter  to  the  ArchbisJiop  of  Canterbury  ott  Some  Circumstances  Con- 
nected ivith  the  Present  Crisis  in  the  English  Church,  p.  112. 
"  Ibid.  p.  117. 

o 


2IO  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Lutherans  being  "absorbed  into  our  Church,  "  and  he  had 
at  first  looked  forward  to  such  an  absorption  with  hope ; 
but  as  to  this  Jerusalem  Bishopric  : — ''  Think,"  he  wrote, 
"only  of  its  effect  on  the  Orthodox  Greek  communion 
(apart  from  the  graver  and  deeper  question  of  the  re- 
sponsibility we  should  ourselves  incur),  what  suspicion 
must  needs  be  cast  upon  us,  that  we  thus,  in  their  very 
presence,  sanction  bodies  whom  they  have  anathematised, 
not  incorporating  them  into  ourselves  nor  infusing  into 
them  our  principles,  but  joined  in  an  outward  alliance 
with  them."  ^  And  all  this  dread  of  alliance  with  Lu- 
therans was  almost  solely  caused  by  the  fact  that  they 
were  not  Episcopalians.  One  cannot  wonder  at  the 
language  which  Pusey's  cousin,  Lord  Ashley,  used  when 
he  wrote  to  him,  on  January  i8,  1842,  with  reference  to 
the  Jerusalem  Bishopric  : — 

"  You  talk,"  wrote  Lord  Ashley,  "  in  allusion  to  the  Bishopric,  of 
'the  grave  injury  of  countenancing  heresy';  this  is  the  necessary 
language,  the  inevitable  issue  of  your  principles ;  thus  you  class  with 
the  Gnostics,  Cerinthians,  &c.,  of  old,  with  the  Munster  Anabaptists 
and  Socinians  of  modern  days,  the  whole  mass  of  the  Protestant 
Churches  of  Europe,  except  England  and  Sweden.  Every  one, 
however  deep  his  piety,  however  holy  his  belief,  however  prostrate 
his  heart  in  faith  and  fear  before  God  and  his  Saviour,  however 
simple  and  perfect  his  reliance  on  the  merits  of  his  Redeemer,  is 
consigned  by  you,  if  he  be  not  Episcopally  ruled,  to  the  outward 
darkness  of  the  children  of  the  Devil ;  while  in  the  same  breath  you 
designate  the  Church  of  Rome  as  the  sweet  Spouse  of  Christ,  and 
hide  all  her  abominable  idolatries  under  the  mantle  of  her  Bishops. 
This  is,  to  my  mind,  absolutely  dreadful ;  and  I  say  of  your  friends, 
as  old  Jacob  said  of  Simeon  and  Levi,  '  Oh,  my  soul,  come  not  thou 
into  their  secret.'"  ^ 

Mr.  Gladstone  was  invited  to  become  one  of  the 
Trustees  of  the  Jerusalem  Bishopric,  and  he  accepted  the 
post,  but  subsequently  withdrew  from  it.  He  was,  how- 
ever, present  at  a  dinner  which  Bunsen  gave  on  October 
15,  1 841,  at  the  Star  and  Garter,  Richmond,  and  at  which 
the   new    Bishop   of   Jerusalem   and   many  other   friends 

^  Pusey's  Letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  on  Some  Circumstances  Con- 
nected with  the  Presefit  Crisis  in  the  English  Church,  p.  115. 
^  Life  of  Lord  Shaftesbury,  pp.  211,  212. 


NEWMAN'S    PROTEST  211 

were  present.  Writing  to  his  wife  afterwards  Biinsen 
said  : — "  Then  I  arose,  and  proposed  '  The  Church  of 
England,  and  the  venerable  Prelates  at  her  Head '  ;  and 
spoke  as  I  felt.  M'Caiil  returned  thanks,  speaking  of 
Jerusalem,  which  led  to  Gladstone's  toast,  '  Prosperity  to 
the  Church  of  St.  James  at  Jerusalem,  and  to  her  first 
Bishop.'  Never  was  heard  a  more  exquisite  speech — it 
flowed  like  a  gentle  and  translucent  stream."  ^ 

As  to  Newman,  he  took  the  matter  so  seriously  to 
heart  that,  as  he  tells  us  in  his  Apologia : — *'  This  was  the 
third  blow,  which  finally  shattered  my  faith  in  the  Angli- 
can Church.  That  Church  was  not  only  forbidding  any 
sympathy  or  concurrence  with  the  Church  of  Rome,  but 
it  actually  was  courting  an  intercommunion  with  Protes- 
tant Prussia  and  the  heresy  of  the  Orientals."  ^  To  his 
friends  Newman  spoke  of  the  Jerusalem  Bishopric  in  such 
terms  as  these  : — "This  atrocious  Jerusalem  Bishop  affair";^ 
"  This  fearful  business  of  the  Bishop  of  Jerusalem"  ;  *  "It 
is  hideous."  ^  So  he  got  up  a  "  Protest "  of  his  own  against 
the  Bishopric,  of  which  Pusey  expressed  his  approval,**  and 
sent  it  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  and  the  Bishop  of 
Oxford,  commencing  thus  : — 

"  Whereas  the  Church  of  England  has  a  claim  on  the  allegiance 
of  Catholic  believers  only  on  the  ground  of  her  own  claim  to  be 
considered  a  branch  of  the  Catholic  Church  : 

"  And  whereas  the  recognition  of  heresy,  indirect  as  well  as  direct, 
goes  far  to  destroy  such  claim  in  the  case  of  any  religious  body 
advancing  it : 

"And  whereas  to  admit  maintainers  of  heresy  to  communion, 
without  formal  renunciation  of  their  errors,  goes  far  towards  recog- 
nising the  same : 

^^  And  whereas  Lutheranism  and  Calvinism  are  heresies,  repugnant 
to  Scripture,  springing  up  three  centuries  since,  and  anathematised 
by  East  as  well  as  West : 

"And  whereas  it  is  reported  that  the  Most  Reverend  Primate 
and  other  Right  Reverend  Rulers  of  our  Church  have  consecrated  a 

^  Memoirs  of  Baron  Bun  sen,  vol.  i.  p.  625. 

^  Apologia  Pro  Vita  Sua,  p.  248. 

3  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  352.  •*  Ibid.  p.  352.  ^  Ibid.  p.  353. 

^  Memoirs  of  James  Hope-Scott,  vol.  i.  p.  317. 


212  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Bishop  with  a  view  to  exercising  spiritual  jurisdiction  over  Protestant, 
that  is,  Lutheran  and  Calvinist,  congregations  in  the  East  .  .  . 

"  On  these  grounds,  I  in  ray  place,  being  a  priest  of  the  English 
Church  and  Vicar  of  St.  Mary  the  Virgin's,  Oxford,  by  way  of 
relieving  my  conscience,  do  hereby  solemnly  protest  against  the 
measure  aforesaid,  and  disown  it,  as  removing  our  Church  from  her 
present  ground,  and  tending  to  her  disorganisation."  ^ 

Opposition  of  this  violent  kind  raised  the  indignation 
of  many  High  Churchmen,  including  some  who  approved 
of  the  earlier  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  and  made 
Archdeacon  Samuel  Wilberforce  declare  :  "  I  confess  I 
feel  furious  at  the  craving  of  men  for  union  with  idola- 
trous, material,  sensual,  domineering  Rome,  and  their 
squeamish  anathematising  hatred  of  Protestant  Reformed 
men."  2 

Another  event  occurred  towards  the  close  of  1841, 
which  requires  notice  in  these  pages,  viz.,  the  contest 
for  the  Professorship  of  Poetry  in  Oxford  University. 
Two  candidates  applied  for  the  vacant  Professorship,  the 
Rev.  Isaac  Williams  ;  and  the  Rev.  James  Garbett,  late 
Fellow  of  Brasenose  College  and  Bampton  Lecturer- 
Elect  for  1842.  The  excitement  which  centred  round 
the  election  was  intense.  It  became  a  great  party  con- 
test, in  which  the  question  before  the  electors  was  only 
nominally,  which  of  the  two  candidates  is  the  best  poet  ? 
The  real  question  for  their  decision  was,  which  is  the 
best  Churchman  ?  Mr.  Williams  was  the  candidate  put 
forward  by  the  Tractarians  ;  Mr.  Garbett  was  the  Pro- 
testant candidate.  The  great  objection  to  Mr.  Williams 
was  caused  by  his  being  the  author  of  two  of  the  Tracts 
for  the  Times  which  had  raised  a  storm  of  indignation 
throughout  the  country.  Each  of  these  Tracts  bore  the 
same  title,  "  On  Reserve  in  Communicating  Religious 
Knowledge,"  the  first  being  No.  80  of  the  Tracts  for  the 
Times,  and  the  second  No.  87  of  the  series.  The  follow- 
ing extracts  from  these  documents  contain  the  passages 

1  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  ii.  pp.  362,  363.     Newman's  Apologia,  pp.  251,  252. 

2  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  i.  p.  213. 


THE   TRACT    ON    "RESERVE"  213 

which  were  most  objected  against  by  Churchmen.      The 
itaHcs  are  mine  :— 

"  The  object  of  the  present  inquiry  is  to  ascertain,  whether  there 
is  not  in  God's  dealings  with  mankind,  a  very  remarkable  holding 
back  of  sacred  and  important  truths,  as  if  the  knowledge  of  them 
were  injurious  to  persons  unworthy  of  them."  ^ 

"  Not  only  is  the  exclusive  and  naked  exposure  of  so  very  sacred 
a  truth  [as  the  'Doctrine  of  the  Atonement']  unscriptural  and 
dangerous,  but,  as  Bishop  Wilson  says,  the  comforts  of  Religion 
ought  to  be  applied  with  great  caution.  And  moreover  to  require, 
as  is  sometimes  done,  from  both  grown  persons  and  children,  an 
exphcit  declaration  of  a  belief  in  the  Atonement,  and  the  full  assur- 
ance of  its  power,  appears  equally  untenable."  ^ 

"These  riches  [that  is,  certain  'sacred  truths']  are  all  secret, 
given  to  certain  dispositions — not  cast  loosely  on  the  world.  .  .  . 
The  great  doctrines  which  of  late  years  have  divided  Christians,  are 
again  of  this  ['  secret ']  kind  very  peculiarly,  such  as  the  subjects  of 
Faith  and  JVorhs,  of  the  free  Grace  of  God,  and  obedience  on  the 
part  of  man.  .  .  .  They  appear  to  be  great  secrets,  notwithstanding 
whatever  may  be  said  of  them,  otily  revealed  to  the  faithful."  ^ 

"With  respect  to  the  Holy  Sacraments,  it  is  in  these,  and  by 
these  chiefly,  that  the  Church  of  all  ages  has  held  the  Doctrine  of  the 
Atonement  after  a  certain  manner  of  reserve.  .  .  .  Now  here  it  is 
very  evident  at  once  that  the  great  difference  between  the  two 
systems  [i.e.  what  Williams  terms  the  true  Catholic,  and  the 
modern  Protestant  system]  consists  in  this,  that  the  one  holds  the 
doctrine  secretly  as  it  were ;  and  the  other  in  a  public  and  popular 
manner."  * 

"^The  same  may  be  shown  with  respect  to  the  pozvers  of 
Priestly  Absolutiofi,  and  the  gifts  conferred  thereby.  It  is  not  re- 
quired for  our  purpose  to  show  the  reality  of  that  power,  and  the 
magnitude  of  those  gifts  which  are  thus  dispensed.  But  a  little 
consideration  will  show,  that  if  the  Church  of  all  ages  is  right  in 
exercising  these  privileges,  the  subject  is  one  entirely  of  this  reserved 
and  mystical  character.  Its  blessings  are  received  in  secret,  accord- 
ing to  faith  :  they  are  such  as  the  world  cannot  behold,  and  cannot 
receive.  The  subject  is  one  so  profound  and  mysterious,  that  it  hardly 
admits  of  being  put  forward  in  a  popular  way,  and  doubtless  more 
injury  than  benefit  would  be  done  to  religion  by  doing  so  incon- 
siderately." ^ 

1  Tract  LXXX.  p.  3.  ^  /^^v/.  p.  78.  *  Ibid.  pp.  48,  49. 

*  Tiaci  LXXX  VI I.  pp.  88,  89.  ^  Ibid.  p.  90. 


214  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

We  cannot  be  surprised  to  learn  that  the  Evangelical 
and  Protestant  Churchmen  of  the  day  were  alarmed  at 
such  teaching  as  this.  They,  at  any  rate,  would  not  be  a 
party  to  the  teaching  that  the  doctrines  of  the  Atonement, 
Faith  and  Works,  the  Free  Grace  of  God,  and  the  Sacra- 
ments were  to  be  treated  as  secrets  to  be  imparted  only 
to  those  who  could  be  trusted.  And  they  had  a  just 
reason  to  dread  that  this  doctrine  of  Reserve  would  be 
used — as  it  actually  was — by  the  Tractarians  to  hide  their 
real  objects  from  cautious  Protestants.  They  acted 
crookedly,  as  Mr.  De  Lisle  tells  us  very  truly,  "for  the 
purpose  of  throwing  dust  in  the  eyes  of  the  Dissenters 
and  the  Low  Churchmen."  ^  Mr.  Williams  himself,  in  his 
Autohiography\  tells  us,  when  describing  the  Poetry  Pro- 
fessorship contest : — "  That  the  Low  Church  party  as  a 
body  should  oppose  me,  as  Wadham  College  did,  was 
all  right  and  natural — my  Tract  No.  80  was  against  them 
— they  rightly  understood  it,  there  was  no  mistake."  ^  And 
again,  Mr.  Williams  writes  : — "  With  regard  to  the  great 
obloquy  it  \Tract  No.  80]  occasioned  from  the  Low  Church 
Party,  this  was  to  be  expected — it  was  against  their 
hollow  mode  of  proceeding ;  it  was  understood  as  it  ivas 
meant,  and  of  this   I   do   not  complain."  ^ 

I  cannot  therefore  think  that  it  was  any  great  cause 
for  surprise  that,  as  soon  as  Mr.  Isaac  Williams'  name  was 
known  as  a  candidate  for  the  vacant  post  of  Professor  of 
Poetry,  the  Evangelical  Party  made  an  effort  to  oppose  it. 
On  November  16,  1841,  a  circular  letter  was  issued  in 
Mr.  Garbett's  favour,  in  which,  after  calling  attention  to 
the  fact  that  Mr.  Williams  was  a  writer  in  the  Tracts  for 
the  Times,  and  author  of  the  Tract  On  Reserve  in  Communi- 
cating Religious  Knoivledge,  it  continued  : — "  The  election  of 
Mr.  Williams  in  Mr.  Keble's  room  would  undoubtedly  be 
represented  as  a  decision  of  Convocation  in  favour  of  his 
party  ;  and  the  resident  members  of  our  College  are 
unanimous  in  thinking  that  this  would  be  a  serious  evil, 
as  well  as  highly  discreditable  to  the  University."  *     The 

^  Life  of  Afubrose  Phillipps  de  Lisle,  vol.  i.  p.  217. 

^  Autobiography  of  Lsaac  IVilliams,  p.  139.  ^  Lbid.  p.  91. 

*  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  262. 


THE    POETRY    PROFESSORSHIP   CONTEST  215 

very  next  day  after  this  letter  was  written,  Dr.  Pusey  sent 
out  a  letter  on  the  same  subject  to  the  members  of  Con- 
vocation, with  whom  rested  the  election,  in  which  he 
advocated  strongly  the  candidature  of  Mr.  Williams,  and 
urged  them  to  vote  for  him.  This  letter  seems  to  have 
displeased  Williams,  because  it  brought  out  the  contro- 
versial question  too  prominently.  "  At  first,"  he  said, 
"  things  went  on  silently  and  quietly,  without  any  overt 
act  that  stamped  it  as  a  religious  or  party  movement. 
But  this  comparative  quietude  was  very  soon  broken  up 
by  Pusey,  unwittingly,  and  as  it  was  thought  most  un- 
wisely, for  what  he  did  immediately  gave  our  adversaries 
all  that  they  desired.  This  was  the  printed  circular 
which  he  issued  in  my  praise  and  in  my  favour,  com- 
plaining of  my  being  bitterly  opposed  merely  and  avow- 
edly for  my  Church  principles.  Upon  this,  the  opposite 
party  had  promises  pouring  in  on  all  sides,  and  many, 
who  had  been  with  us,  held  aloof,  and  some  withdrew 
their  promises.  .  .  .  The  commotion  filled  the  papers  and 
all  parts  of  the  land."  ^  Of  Pusey's  circular.  Dean  Church 
writes : — "  In  an  unlucky  moment  for  Mr.  Williams, 
Dr.  Pusey,  not  without  the  knowledge,  but  without  the 
assenting  judgment  of  Mr.  Newman,  thought  it  well  to 
send  forth  a  circular,  in  Christ  Church  first,  but  soon 
with  wider  publicity,  asking  support  for  Mr.  Williams  as 
a  person  whose  known  religious  views  would  ensure  his 
making  his  office  minister  to  religious  truth.  Nothing 
could  be  more  innocently  meant.  It  was  the  highest 
purpose  to  which  that  office  could  be  devoted.  But  the 
mistake  was  seen  on  all  sides  as  soon  as  made.  The 
Principal  of  Mr.  Garbett's  College,  Dr.  Gilbert,  like  a 
general  jumping  on  his  antagonist  whom  he  had  caught 
in  the  act  of  a  false  move,  put  forth  a  dignified  counter- 
appeal,  alleging  that  he  had  not  raised  this  issue,  but 
adding  that  as  it  had  been  raised  and  avowed  on  the  other 
side,  he  was  quite  willing  that  it  should  be  taken  into 
account,  and  the  dangers  duly  considered  of  that  teaching 
with  which  Dr.  Pusey's  letter  had  identified  Mr.  Williams. 

^  Autobiography  of  Isaac  Williams,  pp.  138,  139. 


2l6  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

No  one  from  that  moment  could  prevent  the  contest  from 
becoming  almost  entirely  a  theological  one,  which  was  to 
try  the  strength  of  the  party  of  the  movement."  '^ 

The  friends  of  Mr.  Williams  quite  expected  that  Arch- 
deacon Samuel  Wilberforce  would  vote  for  him,  and  the 
Rev.  Sir  G.  Prevost  wrote  to  him  for  his  support.  The 
Archdeacon's  reply  is  interesting  and  important,  as  showing 
that  he  had  decided  to  part  company  with  the  Tractarians, 
whose  Homeward  tendencies  began  to  alarm  him. 

"  I  kad  hoped,"  wrote  Wilberforce,  "  to  \ote  for  Isaac  Williams ; 
and  felt  sure  that  I  need  under  no  circumstances  vote  against  him ; 
for  no  mere  interest  of  Poetry,  even  if  a  fitter  man  appeared,  could 
compel  me  to  vote  against  old  friendship.  But  Pusey's  unhappy 
letter  about  it  has  quite  altered  the  circumstances  of  the  case.  He 
has  made  it  a  distinct  question  of  peculiar  tenets,  and  thus  falls  in 
remarkably  with  the  last  British  Critic.  I  cannot  hide  from  myself 
that  now  it  must  be,  whatever  one  means,  simply  expressing  publicly, 
aye  or  no,  one's  approbation  of,  or  dissent  from,  the  most  peculiar 
features  of  the  teaching  of  the  Tract  writers.  With  them,  as  you  well 
know,  I  have  never  agreed.  Their  views  on  many  points  (specially 
the  Tract  on  Reserve)  have  appeared  to  me  so  dangerous,  that,  at  all 
costs,  I  felt  I  must  bear  my  feeble  testimony  against  them  in  my 
Oxford  sermons,  &c.,  &c.  Of  late,  also,  they  have  seemed  to  me  to 
advance  at  immense  speed.  Newman's  view  of  Justification,  the 
language  of  Tract  XC,  the  British  Critic,  &c.,  as  to  Rome ;  the 
craving  after  unity  through  sofne  visible  centre ;  the  saying  that  old 
Rome  was  that  centre  (whereas  I  believe  that  to  be  the  central  point 
of  the  old  Papal  lie,  the  seed  of  everything,  the  truly  putting  the 
Chwxch  for  Christ,  instead  of  showing  it  as  full  of  Christ,  the  root  of 
their  opus  operatum  in  Baptism,  Transubstantiation,  Tradition,  &c., 
&c.) ;  the  fearful  doctrine  of  sin  after  Baptism,  the  whole  tone  about 
the  Reformers,  &c.,  &c.,  all  this  has  pained  and  grieved  me  so 
entirely,  that  I  have  felt  daily  obliged  more  and  more,  from  the  love 
of  the  truth  as  I  saw  it,  from  love  to  our  Church,  whose  principles 
and  very  life  I  believe  this  teachitig  threatens,  with  formality  and 
Romanism  on  the  one  hand,  and  a  cold  formality  and  Dissent  (by 
its  revulsion)  on  the  other,  to  take  on  all  occasions  a  position  of  more 
direct  opposition  to  the  School  than  I  had  of  old  thought  necessary ; 
being  content  before  to  feel  that,  whilst  I  honoured  their  zeal,  and 
was  abashed  by  their  holiness,  and  joined  heartily  in  much  Church 

^  Church's  Oxford  Movement,  p.  274. 


THE    REV.    F.    W.    FABER  S    CONDUCT  217 

truth  they  had  brought  forward,  I  myself  was  of  another  School  of 
opinion  and  feeling  ;  but  now,  feeling  that  one  must  contend  against 
what  was  spreading  so  widely,  and  shedding  the  seeds  of  Romanism 
.  .  .  How  can  I,  at  such  a  moment,  vote  for  Isaac,  with  the  truth 
before  me  that  all  his  voters  will  be  men  who  wish  to  bear  their  testi- 
mony to  their  persuasion  of  the  truth  of  these  principles,  with  which 
Dr.  Pusey's  letter  has  identified  him  in  this  contest  ?  Can  I  escape, 
at  every  sacrifice,  voting  against  him  ?  "  ^ 

It  was  soon  evident  that  what  Mr.  F.  Rogers  (after- 
wards Lord  Blachford,  and  a  warm  friend  of  the  Tract- 
arians),  termed  the  "  most  outrageously  injudicious  letter  "  ^ 
of  Pusey  had  destroyed  any  chance  of  the  success  of 
Williams'  candidature.  But  the  contest  was  carried  on 
until  early  in  January  1842,  when  Mr.  Gladstone  got  up  a 
memorial  to  the  rival  committees  of  Garbett  and  Williams, 
signed  by  253  non-resident  members  of  Convocation,  and 
by  the  Bishops  of  Oxford,  Exeter,  Salisbury,  Ripon,  and 
Sodor  and  Man,  requesting  the  withdrawal  of  both  candi- 
dates. Mr.  Garbett's  committee  declined  to  entertain  the 
proposal,  while  Williams'  committee  suggested  a  compari- 
son of  promises  made  to  both  candidates.  This  latter  pro- 
posal was  accepted  by  Mr.  Garbett's  committee,  and  with 
the  result  that  it  was  found  that  92  i  members  of  Convoca- 
tion had  promised  to  vote  for  Garbett,  while  only  623  had 
promised  to  vote  for  Williams.  The  result  was  that  Mr. 
Williams  withdrew  from  the  contest,  and  Mr.  Garbett  was 
elected  as  Professor  of  Poetry  in  the  room  of  Mr.  Keble. 

With  the  year  1842  the  tide  of  secessions  to  Rome 
from  the  ranks  of  the  Tractarians  began  to  flow  rapidly. 
In  that  year  several  prominent  members  of  the  party 
seceded.  Many  of  the  Tractarians  commenced  passing 
their  holidays  in  visiting  Continental  churches  and  holding 
conferences  with  the  Roman  prelates  and  priests  they  met 
there.  These  visits  greatly  tended  to  move  the  more 
advanced  men  towards  Rome.  One  of  these  travellers, 
who  subsequently  published  a  volume  describing  his  travels, 
was  the  well-known  Rev.  Frederick  William  Faber,  after- 
wards known  as  Father  Faber,  of  the  Brompton  Oratory. 

^  Life  of  Bishop  Wilbeiforce,  vol.  i.  pp.  205,  206. 
^  Letters  of  Lord  Blachford,  p.  106. 


2l8  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

I  have  elsewhere  ^  given  ample  proof  of  Mr.  Faber's  out- 
rageously Romanising  conduct  at  this  period,  and  therefore 
I  need  not  repeat  it  here  ;  but  I  may  be  permitted  to 
mention  a  startling  fact  concerning  his  visit  to  the  Con- 
tinent in  1 841,  with  which  I  have  only  recently  become 
acquainted.  Faber  published,  early  in  1842,  an  account 
of  this  visit  to  the  Continent,  under  the  title  of  Stghfs  and 
Thoughts  in  Foreign  Churches,  filling  no  less  than  645  octavo 
pages.  In  this  book,  Faber  mentions  again  and  again 
certain  interviews  with  an  imaginary  representative  of  the 
Dark  Ages  whom  he  met  during  his  travels,  and  whom  he 
terms  the  ''  Stranger."  He  reports  the  many  assertions  and 
arguments  which  this  "  Stranger "  put  forth  as  a  Roman 
Catholic,  in  favour  of  the  Church  of  Rome  in  the  Dark 
Ages  ;  while,  at  the  same  time,  he  also  reports  in  full  the 
arguments  which  he  (Mr.  Faber)  brought  forward  in  favour 
of  the  Church  of  England  against  the  Papal  claims  of  the 
"  Stranger."  It  now  appears,  on  the  authority  of  Faber's 
biographer,  Father  J.  E.  Bowden,  of  the  Brompton  Ora- 
tory, that  in  this  matter  Faber  deliberately  and  intentionally 
deceived  the  public.  The  Popish  views  which  he  repre- 
sented as  those  expressed  by  the  Romish  "  Stranger  "  were 
in  reality  those  held  at  the  time  by  Faber  himself,  and  many 
of  the  views  expressed  in  the  book  as  his  own  were  those 
to  which  he  was,  in  reality,  strongly  opposed.  "  The 
'  Stranger,' "  writes  Father  Bowden,  "  as  he  is  usually 
called,  personates,  in  fact,  Mr.  Faber's  own  Catholic  feel- 
ings and  tendencies,  against  which  he  appears  to  contend."  ^ 
And  here  we  may  profitably  inquire,  what  were  "  Mr. 
Faber's  own  Catholic  feelings  and  tendencies  "  thus  deceit- 
fully put  by  him  into  the  mouth  of  the  "  Stranger  "  but 
which  were  held  by  him  [Faber],  as  a  clergyman  of  the 
Church  of  England,  four  years  before  he  seceded  to  Rome  ? 
The  "  Stranger  "  is  represented  as  saying  : — 

"To  such  of  you  Englishmen  as  feel  the  want  of  it,  does  not 
celibacy  afford  to  a  priest   one  of  the  underhand  (by  which,  not 

^  Secret  History  of  the  Oxford  Movement,  chapter  i. 

2  Lfe  and  Letters  of  Frederick  William  Faber,  D.D,     By  John  Edward  Bow- 
den, 2nd  edition,  p.  75. 


EXTRACTS  FROM  FABER'S  BOOKS         219 

to  be  misunderstood,  is  meant  unoffending  inwardly  realised)  ways 
in  which  meek  hearts  may  attain  to  a  stronger  feeling  of  communion 
with  the  rest  of  Western  Christendom  ?  "  ^ 

"There  has  seldom  been  a  family  on  a  throne  with  so  few  re- 
spectable qualities  as  the  English  Tudors.  The  bitter  and  narrow- 
minded  Mary  deserves  the  most  esteem  ;  for  she,  through  principles  in 
which  she  had  faith,  gave  up  to  the  Pope  what  was  nearest  and 
dearest  to  a  Tudor's  heart,  unshared  supremacy.^''  ^ 

"  What !  does  not  the  majesty  of  Rome,  that  awful  Church,  so 
overawe  your  spirit  as  to  prevent  your  talking  with  such  curious 
ingenuity  of  Rome's  penitence  ?  "  ^ 

"  Yet  believe  me,  Rome  will  be  permitted  to  lie  grievously  on 
those  who  will  not  reverence  her.  She  is  marked,  not  by  her  own 
hand,  for  reverence."* 

"  Oh,  Rome  I  the  city  of  my  times,  the  place  of  our  glad  and  lowly 
pilgrimages,  how  changed  thou  art  in  many  things,  but  still  thou  art 
Rome,  and  hast  Rome's  prerogative — a  tremendous  power  to  ban  or 
bless!  "6 

"The  usual  Protestant  objections  to  the  legends  and  miracles  of 
the  Middle  Ages  peril  authority  of  the  Holy  Scripture  itself"^ 

"  And  as  to  the  modification  of  the  Monastic  principle  embodied 
in  the  Order  of  the  Jesuits,  you  have  only  to  look  on  the  consistent 
encroachment  which  Rome  has  made  upon  the  strongholds  of  Pro- 
testantism ever  since,  in  order  to  understand  and  estimate  the  extent 
of  service  performed  by  that  Order  for  the  Holy  See.  I  cannot, 
therefore,  agree  with  you,  that  Religious  Orders  have  been  failures. 
On  the  contrary,  a  revival  of  the  Monastic  spirit  seems  to  be 
one  feature  in  every  crisis  of  the  Church,  and  to  bear  fruit  abun- 
dantly." 7 

"You  put  forward  the  highest  possible  claims  for  your  Church  [of 
England],  often  in  a  tone  of  pharisaical  self-conceit,  as  though  the 
usages  and  beliefs  of  the  greater  part  of  Christendom  were  of  no 
account  whatever  in  your  eyes ;  you  repeatedly  indulge  in  a  very 
offensive  sort  of  commiseration  of  Rome,  forgetting,  on  the  one 
hand,  that  you  are  very  young,  and,  on  the  other,  that  Rome's  com- 
munion is  much  more  extensive  than  your  own,  and  comprehends 
wisdom  and  holiness  which  must  demand  the  respect  of  every 
thoughtful  and  modest  man."^ 

^  Sights  and  Thoughts  in  Foreign  Churches.     By  Frederick  William  Faber, 
p.  130. 

2  Ibid.  p.  167.  ^  Ibid.  p.  276. 

3  Ibid.  p.  170.  '  Ibid.-p-   356. 
*  Ibid.   p.  171.  ^  Ibid.   p.  362. 
^  Ibid.  p.  172. 


2  20  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

"  But  the  temper,  which  would  be  called  the  temper  of  persecu- 
tion, might  be  kindled  among  you  [that  is,  in  the  Church  of  England] 
by  Monasteries,  and  would  be  not  the  least  important  blessing  which 
would  spring  from  them."  ^ 

"True,  they  [Monasteries]  have  ['ever  been  nurseries  of  intoler- 
ance and  persecution '] ;  and  can  any  virtue  be  higher  than  an  intoler- 
ance of  evil,  and  a  hunting  it  from  the  earth  ?  Why  be  frightened 
at  words?  Persecution  belongs  not,  strictly  speaking,  to  the 
Church.  Her  weapon,  and  a  most  dire  one,  is  excommunication, 
whereby  she  cuts  off  the  offender  from  the  fountains  of  life  in  this 
world,  and  makes  him  over  from  her  own  judgment  to  that  of 
Heaven  in  the  world  to  come.  But  surely  it  is  the  duty  of  Christian 
States  to  deprive  such  an  excomnumicate  person  of  every  social  right 
and  privilege ;  to  lay  on  him  such  pains  and  penalties  as  may  seem 
good  to  the  wisdom  of  the  law;  or  even,  if  they  so  Judge,  to  siveep  him 
from  the  earth.  The  least  which  can  be  done  is  to  make  a  civil  death 
to  follow  an  ecclesiastical  death;  and  this  must  be  done  where  the 
Church  and  State  stand  in  right  positions  to  each  other."  ^ 

If  conduct  like  this  of  Faber's,  in  passing  off  as  the 
opinions  of  a  Romanist  what  were  really  his  own 
opinions  ;  and  representing  himself  as  opposed  to  most  of 
them,  can  be  justified,  it  will  follow  that  we  can  never 
know  what  an  author's  opinions  really  are.  To  my  mind 
Faber  was  guilty  of  shameful  and  inexcusable  deception, 
which  reminds  me  very  forcibly  of  what  another  Tract- 
arian  clergyman  of  the  period,  the  Rev.  W.  G.  Ward, 
used  to  say  to  his  disciples  :  — "  Make  yourselves  clear 
that  you  are  justified  in  deception,  and  then  lie  like  a 
trooper  ! "  ^ 

It  was  in  the  year  1842  that  the  Rev.  WilHam  Goode 
(afterwards  Dean  of  Ripon)  came  publicly  forward  as  a 
learned  and  able  champion  of  Reformation  principles 
against  the  Tractarians.  Evangelical  Churchmen  owe  a 
lasting  debt  of  gratitude  to  Mr.  Goode  for  the  many  pamph- 
lets and  books  he  wrote  against  the  Romeward  Movement. 
They  are  of  permanent  value,  and  as  much  needed  at  the 

1  Sights  and  Thoughts  in  Foreign  Churches.      By  Frederick  William  Faber, 
p.  420. 

2  Ibid.  p.  419. 

3  William    George    Ward  and  the   Oxford  Movement.      By  Wilfrid  Ward, 

P-3I. 


MR.    GOODE'S    PROTESTANT    WORKS  22  1 

present  time  as  when  they  were  first  issued.  It  is  a  pity 
that  they  are  not  more  widely  known,  for  the  arguments 
they  contain  are  as  much  needed  now  as  when  they  were 
first  pubHshed.  Mr.  Goode's  pamphlet,  The  Case  as  It  Is, 
issued  in  1842,  was  an  able  reply  to  Dr.  Pusey's  Letter  to 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  which  I  have  already  noticed. 
In  this  pamphlet  Mr.  Goode  clearly  proved  that  he,  at 
least,  was  alive  to  the  serious  nature  of  the  issues  which 
were  at  stake.  His  opening  sentence  shows  it.  ''That 
the  very  existence  of  the  English  Church,"  he  wrote,  "  as 
restored  by  our  Reformers,  depends  upon  the  issue  of  the 
controversy  raised  within  her  by  the  authors  of  the  Tracts 
for  the  Times,  and  their  adherents,  can  hardly  be  now  con- 
sidered a  doubtful  matter."  ^  Mr.  Goode  exposes  the 
Romanising  character  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Tractarians 
(whom  he  terms  "  Tractators ")  by  copious  quotations 
from  their  writings  ;  and  at  the  same  time  gives  a  startling 
exhibition  of  the  methods  of  quotation  which  they  adopted, 
when  citing  in  their  favour  the  chief  writers  of  the  Re- 
formed Church,  whose  real  principles,  as  he  clearly  proves, 
were  strongly  opposed  to  those  held  by  the  Tractarians. 
"  Isolated  sentences  from  our  great  divines,"  wrote  Mr. 
Goode,  "  have  been  paraded  before  the  public  eye,  as 
evidence  of  their  approval  of  sentiments  which  their  works, 
as  a  whole,  show  that  they  abhorred."  ^ 

Mr.  Goode's  great  work  was  The  Divine  Rule  of  Faith 
and  Practice,  published  this  year  in  two  large  volumes,  of 
which  a  second  and  enlarged  edition  was  published,  in 
three  volumes,  in  1853.^  The  author  showed  an  exten- 
sive and  intimate  acquaintance,  not  only  with  the  writings 
of  our  great  Anglican  Divines,  but  also  with  those  of  the 
Fathers  of  the  Christian  Church.  His  subject  was  one 
of  the  highest  importance,  and  he  dealt  with  it  in  a 
masterly  manner.      It  is  a  pity  that  the  work  has  never 

^  The  Case  as  It  Is ;  or,  a  Reply  to  the  Letter  of  Dr.  Pusey,  2nd  edition, 
p.  5,  London  :   1842. 

'  Ibid.  p.  50. 

*  The  Divine  Rule  of  Faith  and  Practice ;  or,  "A  Defence  of  the  Catholic 
Doctrine  that  Holy  Scripture  has  been,  since  the  Times  of  the  Apostles,  the  sole 
Divine  Rule  of  Faith  and  Practice  to  the  Church,"  2nd  edition.  Three  vols. 
London  :  1853. 


222  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

been  issued  in  an  abridged  form.  The  late  Lord  Chan- 
cellor Selborne  says,  in  a  passage  already  cited,  that 
"  When  William  Goode,  afterwards  Dean  of  Ripon,  in  his 
Divine  Rule  of  Faith  and  Practice^  called  the  Fathers  them- 
selves as  witnesses  in  favour  of  the  direct  use  of  Scripture 
for  the  decision  of  controversies,  some  of  those  who 
placed  confidence  in  the  Oxford  Divines,  but  were  them- 
selves ignorant  of  the  Fathers,  waited  anxiously  for  answers 
which  never  came."  ^ 

In  May  1842,  Dr.  Bagot,  Bishop  of  Oxford,  delivered 
his  fourth  Visitation  Charge  to  his  clergy,  in  which  at 
some  length  he  directed  attention  to  the  Tractarian  Move- 
ment. He  stated  that  he  saw  no  reason  to  alter  his  senti- 
ments, as  to  the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  which  he  had  expressed 
in  his  third  Visitation  Charge,  in  1838,  in  which  he  had 
called  attention  to  what  he  conceived  to  have  been  good  in 
those  Tracts,  and  to  "  the  tendencies  in  them  which "  he 
"  considered  dangerous "  ;  and  in  which  he  had  stated 
that  his  "  fears  arose,  for  the  most  part,  rather  from  the 
disciples  than  the  teachers."  ^  He  again  praised  the  Tract 
writers  for  their  personal  character  and  conduct,  though 
as  to  Tract  XC.  he  declared  : — "  I  cannot  reconcile  myself 
to  a  system  of  interpretation,  which  is  so  subtle,  that  by 
it  the  Articles  may  be  made  to  mean  anything  or  no- 
thing." ^  Nevertheless,  he  asserted  of  the  Tracts  as  a 
whole,  that  they  "  have,  from  their  commencement,  ex- 
erted a  beneficial  influence  amongst  us  in  many  respects."* 
As  to  the  disciples  of  the  Tract  writers,  for  them  he  had 
words  of  severe  censure.  "  They  are,"  he  said,  "  doing  no 
good  service  to  the  Church  of  England,  by  their  recent  pub- 
lications of  manuals  of  private  devotion,  extracted  from 
the  Breviary  and  similar  sources — by  inserting  therein  no 
small  portion  of  highly  objectionable  matter,  and  tacitly, 
if  not  openly,  encouraging  young  persons  to  be  dissatisfied 
with  what  God  has  given  them."  ^     He  thought  there  was 

1  Mefftorials  Family  atid  Personal,  1766-1865.  By  the  Earl  of  Selborne, 
vol.  i.  p.  210. 

*  A  Cha>-ge  Delivered  by  Richard  Bagot,  D.D,,  Bishop  of  Oxford,  p.  16. 
Oxford  :   1842. 

3  Ibid.  p.  17.  •*  Ibid,  p.  19.  ^  Ibid.  p.  23. 


BISHOP    BAGOT  S    CHARGE    CRITICISED  223 

a  very  real  danger  of  secessions  to  Rome,  not,  however, 
from  amongst  the  clergy,  but  from  the  young  and  rising 
generation  ;  and  he  urged  the  clergy  to  do  all  in  their 
power  to  prevent  such  secessions. 

It  was  by  no  means  a  satisfactory  Charge  on  the 
whole,  and  it  seems  to  have  given  more  pleasure  than 
annoyance  to  the  leaders  of  the  Tractarian  party.  New- 
man wrote  to  Keble  about  it,  on  May  24,  1842  : — "You 
will  be  glad  to  hear  that  the  Bishop's  Charge  delivered 
yesterday  was  very  favourable  to  us,  or  rather  to  our 
cause,  for  some  of  us  suffered."  ^  The  Evangelical  Mr. 
Goode  was,  however,  by  no  means  pleased  with  the 
Charge,  and,  therefore,  at  once  subjected  it  to  a  public 
criticism,  in  the  form  of  a  Letter  to  the  Bishop,  who  is 
reminded  by  Mr.  Goode  that  the  Romanists  had  termed 
him,  as  the  author  of  such  a  Charge,  "  the  apologist  of 
the  Tractarians."  ^  "  Tractarianism,"  Mr.  Goode  said  to 
the  Bishop,  "  has  been  nursed  under  your  eye.  It  has 
professed  a  readiness  to  act  according  to  your  bidding. 
You  have  suffered  it  to  spread  its  principles  in  all  direc- 
tions throughout  the  Church.  You  have  permitted  it  to 
proceed  in  its  career  unchecked."  ^  He  pointed  out  the 
inconsistencies  of  the  Charge.  "  One  part  of  the  Charge 
seems  to  be  answered  by  another."  ^  It  is  sometimes 
supposed  that  the  Tractarians  preached  the  pure  Gospel. 
Mr.  Goode  did  not  think  so.  "  My  Lord,"  he  wrote  to 
Dr.  Bagot,  "  if  the  Tractarians  are  preaching  the  Gospel 
of  Christ  in  any  degree  of  purity,  their  opponents  are  not 
so  preaching  it  ;  and  if  their  opponents  are  so  preaching 
it,  they  are  not.  This  they  have  themselves  admitted,  nay 
urged  upon  us."  ^  In  conclusion  he  said  : — "  The  reflec- 
tion forces  itself  upon  the  most  unthinking,  How  different 
would  have  been  the  state  of  things,  if  four  years  ago  the 
admonitions  of  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  had  been  distinct 
and  decisive  !     God  grant  that  another  four   years  may 

^  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  396. 

^  Some  Difficulties  in  the  late   Charge  of  the  Bishop  of  Oxford.     By  William 
Goode,  M.A.,  p.  3.     London:  1842. 

2  Ibid.  p.  5.  *  Ibid.  p.  14.  ^  Ibid.  p.  29. 


2  24  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

not  force  upon  your  lordship  and  the  Church  reflections 
still  more  painful."  ^ 

In  this  same  year  the  Rev.  George  Stanley  Faber  pub- 
lished his  most  useful  Provincial  Letters  from  the  County- 
Palatine  of  Durham,  directed  against  the  Tractarians. 
Mr.  Faber  was  a  learned  and  prolific  writer,  and  his  works 
on  the  Roman  controversy  are  well  worthy  of  study  at 
the  present  time.^ 

It  was  in  the  year  1842  that  the  first  annual  meeting 
of  the  Parker  Society  was  held.  The  Society  was  formed 
in  1840,  and  completed  its  work  in  1855.  It  was  founded 
for  the  purpose  of  "  reprinting,  without  abridgment,  altera- 
tion, or  omission,  the  best  Works  of  the  Fathers  and  early 
Writers  of  the  Reformed  English  Church,  published  in  the 
period  between  the  accession  of  King  Edward  VI.  and  the 
death  of  Queen  Elizabeth  ;  secondly,  the  printing  of  such 
remains  of  other  Writers  of  the  Sixteenth  Century  as 
may  appear  desirable  (including,  under  both  classes,  some 
of  the  early  English  Translations  of  the  Foreign  Re- 
formers) ;  and  thirdly,  the  printing  of  some  manuscripts 
of  the  same  authors,  hitherto  unpublished."  ^  There  can 
be  no  doubt  that  the  object  of  the  promoters  of  the  Parker 
Society  was  to  counteract,  as  far  as  possible,  the  influence 
of  certain  portions  of  the  Library  of  Anglo-Catholic  Theology, 
issued  by  the  Tractarians,  and  including  the  works  of 
several  Laudian  Divines  of  the  seventeenth  century,  and 
the  Nonjurors.  Lord  Ashley  became  the  first  President 
of  the  Parker  Society,  and  from  the  commencement  of  its 
operations  it  was  most  successful.  Its  first  annual  report 
stated  that  no  fewer  than  upwards  of  6000  annual  sub- 
scriptions of  one  guinea  each  had  been  received.  Amongst 
the  subscribers  were  the  Dowager  Queen  Adelaide,  Prince 
Albert,  the  King  of  Prussia,  the  Dukes  of  Kent,  Sussex, 
Devonshire,  and  Sutherland,  and  the  Bishops  of  London, 

1  Some  Difficulties  in  the  late  Charge  of  the  Bishop  of  Oxford.  By  William 
Goode,  M.A.,  p.  30.     Lomion :  1842. 

^  Provincial  Letters  from  the  Coimty- Palatine  of  Durham,  exhibiting  the 
Nature  and  Tendency  of  the  Principles  put  forth  by  the  Writers  of  the  Tracts Jor 
the  Times,  and  their  various  Allies  and  Associates.  By  the  Rev.  G.  Stanley 
Faber.     Two  vols.     1842. 

^  First  Annual  Report  pf  the  Parker  Society,  1842,  p.  10. 


THE    PARKER    SOCIETY  225 

Durham,  Winchester,  Lincoln,  Rochester,  Llandaff,  Ches- 
ter, Worcester,  Ripon,  Peterborough,  Lichfield,  Chichester, 
Worcester,  and  Sodor  and  Man.  The  second  annual 
report  announced  that  for  1843  7500  subscriptions  had 
come  in.  In  1849  it  was  reported  that  the  Duchess  of 
Kent  and  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  and  York  had 
become  subscribers.  In  issuing  the  thirteenth  and  final 
report  the  Committee  of  the  Parker  Society  state  that 
they  had  published  in  all  fifty-five  volumes  of  the  writings 
of  the  Protestant  Reformers,  including  an  Index  Volume 
to  the  whole  of  their  publications.  These  volumes  con- 
tain the  writings  of  Cranmer,  Ridley,  Latimer,  Jewel, 
Hooper,  Bradford,  Nowell,  Whitaker,  and  other  promi- 
nent men  of  the  sixteenth  century.  Those  who  wish  to 
find  strong  arguments  against  Ritualistic  doctrines,  drawn 
from  the  Bible  and  the  writings  of  the  Fathers,  cannot 
do  better  than  consult  the  publications  of  the  Parker 
Society. 


CHAPTER  IX 

Dr.  Pusey's  sermon  on  The  Holy  Eucharist — Denounced  to  the  Vice- 
Chancellor— The  Six  Doctors — Their  opinion  of  the  sermon — 
Private  negotiations  with  Pusey — Pusey  suspended  for  two  years 
— His  protest — Dr.  Hawkins'  explanatory  letter — Proposed  friendly 
prosecution — Lord  Camoys  on  Pusey's  sermon — Curious  Clerical 
Libel  Case — An  extraordinary  Clerical  Brawling  Case — Protests 
against  Puseyism — The  English  Churchman  started  by  the  Pusey- 
ites — Newman's  progress  Romeward — He  resigns  St.  Mary's  and 
retires  to  Littlemore — Archdeacon  Wilberforce  on  "  the  insane  love 
for  Rome  "—Palmer's  Narrative  of  Events — Pusey  issues  "  adapted  " 
Roman  Catholic  books  of  devotion — Newman  tells  him  they  will 
"promote  the  cause  of  the  Church  of  Rome" — Hook  thinks  "they 
will  make  men  Infidels" — Extracts  from  these  books — What  Pius 
IX.  said  about  Dr.  Pusey — Bishop  Blomfield  on  the  effect  of  adapted 
Roman  books — Puseyites  advocate  Ecclesiastical  Prosecutions  of 
Protestant  clergy — The  Bishop  of  Exeter  and  the  Surplice  in  the 
Pulpit — Legality  of  the  Black  Gown  in  the  Pulpit — Ward's  Ideal  of 
a  Christiati  Church — Puseyite  attack  on  Dr.  Symons — Defeated — 
Attempt  to  prosecute  the  Rev.  James  Garbett — Failure — Stone 
Altars  and  Credence  Tables — Faulkener  v.  Litchfield — Judgment 
of  the  Court  of  Arches — The  Cambridge  Camden  Society — De- 
nounced by  the  Rev.  F.  Close. 

The  most  important  ecclesiastical  event  in  the  year  1843 
was  the  sermon  on  The  Holy  Eucharist  a  Comfort  to  the 
Penitent,  preached  by  Dr.  Pusey  before  the  University  on 
the  fourth  Sunday  after  Easter,  which  led  to  his  being 
suspended  from  preaching  in  the  University  pulpit  for  two 
years.  In  this  sermon  he  taught,  in  unmistakable  terms,  the 
doctrine  of  the  Real  Presence  in  the  consecrated  elements, 
and  what  is  termed  the  Eucharistic  Sacrifice.  The  fol- 
lowing extracts  from  the  sermon  show  what  his  teaching 
was  on  this  subject : — 

"  And  we,  if  we  are  wise,  shall    never  ask  how  they  can  be 
elements  of  this  world  and  yet  His  very  Body  and  Blood."  ^ 

*  The  Holy  Eucharist  a  Cofufort  to  the  Penitent,  p.  7.     Oxford  :  1843. 

226 


PUSEY'S    sermon    on    the    EUCHARIST  227 

"  The  same  reality  of  the  Divine  Gift  makes  It  Angels'  food  to 
the  Saint,  the  ransom  to  the  sinner.  And  both  because  It  is  the 
Body  and  Blood  of  Christ.  Were  it  only  a  thankful  commemoration 
of  His  redeeming  love,  or  only  a  showing  forth  of  His  death,  or  a 
strengthening  ofily  and  refreshing  of  the  soul,  it  were  indeed  a  reason- 
able service,  but  it  would  have  no  direct  healing  for  the  sinner.  To 
him  its  special  joy  is  that  it  is  his  Redeemer's  very  Broken  Body,  It 
is  His  Blood,  which  was  shed  for  the  remission  of  his  sins.  In  the 
words  of  the  Ancient  Church,  he  '  drinks  his  ransom,'  he  eateth  that, 
'the  very  Body  and  Blood  of  the  Lord,  the  only  Sacrifice  for  sin,' 
God  '  poureth  out '  for  him  yet  '  the  most  precious  Blood  of  His 
Only  Begotten.'"! 

"And'this  may  have  been  another  truth,  which  our  Lord  in- 
tended to  convey  to  us,  when  He  pronounced  the  words  as  the  form 
which  consecrates  the  sacramental  elements  into  His  Body  and 
Blood,  that  that  Precious  Blood  is  still,  in  continuance  and  applica- 
tion of  His  One  Oblation  once  made  upon  the  Cross,  poured  out 
for  us  now,  conveying  to  our  souls,  as  being  His  Blood,  with  the 
other  benefits  of  His  Passion,  the  remission  of  our  sins  also.  .  .  . 
'That  which  is  in  the  Cup,'  S.  Chrysostome  paraphrases,  'is  that 
which  flowed  from  His  side,  and  of  that  do  we  partake.'  How 
should  we  approach  His  Sacred  Side,  and  remain  leprous  still? 
Touching  with  our  very  lips  that  cleansing  Blood,  how  may  we  not, 
with  the  Ancient  Church,  confess,  '  Lo,  this  hath  touched  my  lips, 
and  shall  take  away  mine  iniquities  and  cleanse  my  sins ? '"  2 

The  Lady  Margaret  Professor  of  Divinity,  Dr.  Faussett, 
denounced  the  sermon  at  once  to  the  Vice-Chancellor 
(Dr.  Wynter),  and  requested  him  to  apply  to  Pusey  for  a 
copy  of  his  sermon,  in  order  that  the  soundness  of  its 
doctrine  might  be  tested.  In  sending  this  request  on  to 
Pusey  the  Vice-Chancellor  wrote  : — "  I  do  not  know  that 
at  this  period  of  time  it  is  necessary  that  I  should  express 
my  own  opinion  upon  it  [Pusey's  sermon,  which  he  had 
heard  preached].  But  in  candour  and  fairness  I  think  it 
right  to  confess  that  its  general  scope  and  certain  par- 
ticular passages  have  awakened  in  my  mind  painful  doubts 
with  regard  to  its  strict  conformity  to  the  doctrines  of  the 
Reformed  Church  of  England."  ^     After  a  delay  of  a  few 

^   The  Holy  Eucharist  a  Comfort  to  the  Penitent,  p.  18. 

"^  Ibid.  pp.  22,  23. 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  311. 


228  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

days,  and  the  insertion  by  him  into  the  manuscript  of 
certain  references  to  the  writings  of  the  Fathers,  Pusey 
sent  his  sermon  as  requested,  together  with  a  letter,  in 
which  he  said  : — "  I  felt  so  entirely  sure  that  I  heartily 
concur  with  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England,  I 
have  so  often  and  decidedly  expressed  my  rejection  of  the 
doctrine  of  Transubstantiation,  and  the  Canons  of  the 
Council  of  Trent  upon  it,  that,  neither  before  nor  after 
preaching  my  sermon,  had  I  the  slightest  thought  that 
any  could  arraign  it  as  contrary  to  the  doctrines  of  our 
Church  "  ;  and,  he  added  : — "  I  believe  that  after  Con- 
secration the  Holy  Elements  are  in  their  natural  sub- 
stances bread  and  wine,  and  yet  are  also  the  Body  and 
Blood  of  Christ.  This  I  believe  is  a  mystery."  ^  He 
concluded  with  a  request  that  the  Vice-Chancellor  would 
"  choose  that  course  allowed  by  the  Statute  which  permits 
the  accused  to  answer  for  himself."  The  Vice-Chancellor 
thereupon  appointed  six  Doctors  as  judges  to  try  the  case, 
of  whom  he  was  himself  one.  They  met  for  the  first  time 
on  May  24th,  when  the  sermon  was  read  to  them  and 
discussed.  They  met  again  on  May  27th,  when  the  greater 
number  of  them  brought  with  them  separate  written 
opinions  on  the  sermon.  One  of  the  number.  Dr.  Jelf,  a 
personal  friend  of  Pusey's,  who  had  consented  to  be  one 
of  his  judges  "  with  the  hope  of  benefiting "  him,^  said 
that  he  did  not  think  the  sermon  contrary  to  the  teaching 
of  the  Church  of  England  ;  but  even  he  had  to  acknow- 
ledge that  there  was  in  it  "  much  that  is  objectionable  in 
tone,  and  language,  and  tendency."  ^  Having  heard  the 
opinion  of  the  Court,  the  Vice-Chancellor  declared  that  he 
"  considered  Dr.  Pusey  guilty  of  the  charge  made  against 
him — namely,  that  he  had  preached  certain  things  which 
were  either  dissonant  from  or  contrary  to  the  doctrine  of 
the  Church  of  England."  ' 

Dr.  Pusey's  request  to  be  heard  personally  at  the  trial 
was  not  acceded  to.  The  biographer  of  Bishop  Samuel 
Wilberforce  says  that,  "  The  Statute  under  which  the  Board 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  313.  '^  Ibid.  p.  315. 

^  Ibid.  p.  317.  *  Ibid.  p.  317. 


PUSEY    AND    THE    SIX    DOCTORS  229 

was  appointed  gave  the  accused  the  right  to  claim  a  hearing 
in  his  own  defence  "  ;  ^  but  this  was  not  the  case.  One  of 
the  three  eminent  Counsel,  later  on  employed  (by  Pusey)  to 
give  a  legal  opinion  on  the  case  (the  Solicitor-General),  gave 
it  as  his  opinion  that  the  Statute  "  did  not  necessarily  require 
a  hearing."  ^  Canon  Liddon  says  expressly  that  : — "  It  was 
true  that  the  Statute  did  not  provide  in  express  terms  that 
the  author  of  a  delated  sermon  should  be  heard  in  expla- 
nation or  defence  of  his  language."  ^  Nevertheless  it  seems 
that  it  was  open  to  the  Vice-Chancellor  to  have  granted 
Pusey's  request,  and  I  think  it  is  much  to  be  regretted  that 
he  did  not  do  so.  I  do  not,  however,  suppose  that  if 
Pusey  had  thus  personally  appeared  before  his  judges  that 
it  would  have  altered  their  decision  ;  and  I  believe  that 
their  judgment  when  given  was  a  just  one.  Many  a  just 
judgment  has  been  given  even  after  a  faulty  trial.  Yet, 
strictly  speaking,  Pusey's  friends  of  the  present  day  are  not 
accurate  in  saying  that  he  had  no  "hearing"  before  judg- 
ment was  published  against  him  ;  nor  is  it  correct  to  state 
that  his  judges  did  not  mention  to  him  particular  passages 
of  his  sermon  which  they  considered  unsound.  It  is  true 
they  did  not  hear  his  actual  voice ;  but  they  had  before 
them,  and  seriously  considered,  a  lengthy  statement  in  self- 
defence  and  explanation  from  \iy&  pen ;  and  in  this  sense 
of  the  word  he  was  not  condemned  unheard.  And  that 
written  statement  of  his  was  based  upon  particular  extracts 
from  his  sermons  to  which  his  attention  had  been  called 
privately  by  the  Vice-Chancellor,  who  requested  a  retracta- 
tion of  some  of  the  specified  statements  of  Pusey.  The 
two  documents  forwarded  to  Pusey  from  the  Vice-Chan- 
cellor, containing  these  extracts,  are  published  in  full  in 
the  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  pages  323,  324 ;  and  his  reply,  de- 
fending and  explaining  his  position,  fill  four  closely  printed 
pages  of  that  Life,  from  page  364  to  368.  "  On  the  after- 
noon of  Thursday,  June  i,"  says  Canon  Liddon,  "  the 
Vice-Chancellor  and  the  Six  Doctors  met  for  a  third  time, 
and  in  order  to  consider  Pusey's  reply.      That  it  did  not 

1  Life  of  Bishop  VVilberforce,  vol.  i.  p.  228. 

2  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  354.  ^  Ibid.  p.  317. 


230  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

satisfy  them  goes  without  saying."  ^  On  the  following  day 
the  Vice-Chancellor  published  the  sentence  of  suspension 
of  Dr.  Pusey  from  preaching  in  the  University  pulpit.  On 
the  same  day  Pusey  published  and  circulated  a  protest 
against  the  sentence,  in  which  occurs  the  following  startling 
statement: — "  I  have  ground  to  think  that,  as  no  propositions 
out  of  my  sermon  have  been  exhibited  to  me  as  at  variance 
with  the  doctrine  of  our  Churchy  so  neither  can  they."^  The 
negotiations  which  had  taken  place  between  the  Vice- 
Chancellor  and  Pusey  were,  by  the  former's  request,  treated 
as  secret  and  confidential.  Were  it  not  for  this,  I  do  not 
think  Pusey  could  ever  have  dared  to  make  the  untrue 
statement  contained  in  the  extract  from  his  protest  just 
given.  That  Pusey  himself  thought  he  had  had  some 
opportunity  of  defending  himself  is  clear  from  the  private 
letter  he  sent  to  the  Vice-Chancellor  on  the  day  of  the 
sentence  and  protest  : — "  It  does  seem  to  me,"  he  wrote, 
"  to  be  so  utterly  contrary  to  all  principles  of  justice  and 
equity  (not  to  speak  of  charity)  to  afford  me  no  further 
opportunity  of  vindication,  that  I  can  only  say  I  pray  that  my 
judges  may  not,  in  the  Great  Day,  receive  the  measure 
which  they  have  dealt  to  me."^  He  had,  therefore,  on  his 
own  showing,  "some  opportunity  of  vindication"  of  his 
position,  as  the  words  "  no  further  opportunity  "  implies ; 
but  he  thought  the  opportunity  was  not  sufficient  ;  and  in 
this,  to  a  certain  extent,  I  am  disposed  to  agree  with  him. 
But  nothing  I  have  been  able  to  discover  justifies  him  in 
asserting  that  no  propositions  from  his  sermon  had  been 
exhibited  to  him.  Rumours  soon  got  abroad  challenging 
the  veracity  of  Pusey.  They  troubled  him  exceedingly, 
and  no  wonder.  So  he  thought  he  would  draw  a  red 
herring  across  the  trail  of  his  opponents,  by  shifting  the 
controversy,  from  the  truthfulness  of  his  protest  and  his 
own  reputation,  to  the  merits  of  the  sermon  itself,  and  this 
by  publishing  the  much  criticised  discourse.  So,  on  June 
nth,  he  wrote  to  Newman  : — "Ward  told  me  yesterday 
evening  some  statements  in  the  Morning  Chronicle  about 
my  Protest  being  'Jesuitical,'  'every  one  here  being  dis- 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii,  p.  325. 

2  Ibid.  p.  329.  ^  Ibid.  p.  330. 


DR.    HAWKINS'    EXPLANATION 


231 


giisted  at  it,'  &c.,  which  makes  it  necessary  to  determine 
how  to  act.  One  Hne  to  which  I  have  been  incHning  this 
morning,  is  to  let  these  things  die  a  natural  death,  commit 
my  own  reputation  to  God,  stop  privately  the  Protest  in 
London,  and  bring  out  my  sermon,  which  will  at  once  shift 
the  battle  from  these  grounds  to  the  theological  questions.  .  .  . 
I  feared,  as  soon  as  I  knew  it,  that  they  would  make  out  a 
plausible  case  of  inaccuracy  against  me;  people  will  believe 
just  as  they  wish,  and  the  whole  controversy  will  be  about 
my  veracity,  which  will  indispose  people  to  the  truths  of 
the  sermon  when  it  appears."  ^  Tactics  such  as  these  were 
worthy  of  one  who  had  already  obtained  a  character  for 
Jesuitical  conduct.  An  explanation  published  by  Dr.  Haw- 
kins, one  of  the  Six  Doctors,  on  December  31,  1844,  in 
the  form  of  a  letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Exeter,  may  here  be 
quoted  : — 

"  I  will  give,"  wrote  Dr.  Hawkins,  "  some  account  of  the  pro- 
ceedings— such  as,  I  hope,  may  show  that,  if  they  were  in  any  way 
technically  informal,  they  were  substantially  correct  and  just. 

"  It  was,  of  course,  our  duty  to  act  under  the  Statute ;  we  had 
no  power  to  amend  it,  and  having  ascertained  the  sense  of  the 
Statute  as  correctly  as  we  could,  with  the  aid  of  those  recorded 
precedents  to  which  we  had  access,  we  were  satisfied  that  our 
business  in  the  first  instance  was  exclusively  with  the  written 
sermon.  If,  indeed,  the  preacher  could  produce  no  copy  of  his 
discourse,  the  Statute  expressly  provided  that  he  should  be  called 
upon  to  answer  personally  concerning  the  matters  of  which  he  was 
suspected  or  accused ;  but  if  (as  in  this  instance)  he  delivered  an 
authentic  copy  of  the  sermon,  there  was  no  room  for  evidence  or  cross- 
examination,  and  we  had  only  to  consider  the  sermon  itself,  not 
discussing  with  the  writer  the  doctrines  which  it  contained,  but  compar- 
ing them  with  the  formularies  of  the  Church.  This  painful  duty, 
accordingly,  we  endeavoured  to  discharge  as  carefully  as  we  could. 

"  Yet,  in  point  of  fact,  we  had  also  before  us,  at  that  time,  some  ex- 
planation and  defence  of  the  sermon  frotn  the  author.  For  Dr.  Pusey  sent 
a  letter  ivith  the  sermon,  explaining  his  sentiments  at  greater  length 
with  reference  to  the  passage  which  was  the  most  likely  to  be  mis- 
construed ;  and  he  both  prefaced  his  copy  of  the  sermon  and 
accompanied  it  throughout  with  parallel  passages  from  older  Divines 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  336. 


232  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

and  from  the  Fathers,  intended  to  justify  the  expressions  which  he 
had  used. 

"But  the  judgment  upon  the  sermon  was  only  the  first  stage  of 
the  proceedings.  The  Vice-Chancellor,  having  now  to  consider  the 
question  as  it  respected  the  writer^  could  not  forget  that  a  writer's 
meaning  might  be  misapprehended,  or  his  expressions  admit  of 
qualification  or  correction,  and  even  if  in  themselves  censurable, 
might  be  no  proof  that  the  author  entertained  '  unsound  opinions,' 
For  the  purpose  of  preventing  such  misapprehensions,  therefore,  he 
entered  into  communication  with  Dr.  Pusey  in  the  interval  between 
the  delivery  of  the  judgment  upon  the  sermon  (May  27)  and  the 
sentence  issuing  against  the  preacher  (June  2). 

"  It  is  true,  the  Vice-Chancellor,  who  is  as  kind  as  he  is 
upright,  did  not  desire  the  writer  to  wait  upon  him,  nor  did  he 
call  upon  the  writer,  nor  did  he  consider  it  his  duty  to  enter  into 
controversy  with  the  preacher  concerning  points  of  doctrine,  and  did 
not  in  this  sense  hear  him ;  hit  he  sent  to  Dr.  Pusey,  by  his  most 
intimate  friend,  written  papers,  stating  the  specific  objections  taken  to 
his  discourse,  and  giving  him  opportunity  to  disclaim  any  meaning 
improperly  attached  to  his  expressions,  and  to  declare  his  adherence 
to  those  parts  of  our  Articles  and  formularies  with  which,  under 
such  imputed  meanings,  his  expressions  had  appeared  to  be  at  vari- 
ance. Dr.  Pusey  replied  to  these  communications  at  some  length,  but 
the  papers  not  having  proved  satisfactory  to  him,  and  his  answers 
having  failed  to  satisfy  the  Vice-Chancellor,  the  result  was  made 
known  to  the  assessors,  and  the  sentence  issued."  ^ 

In  reply  to  this  letter,  Dr.  Pusey  wrote  : — "  It  is  my 
duty  to  state  explicitly  that  the  communications  made  to 
me,  after  my  sermon  had  been  condemned,  were  expressly 
declared  by  the  Vice-Chancellor  to  have  been  made  with 
a  view  to  recantation,  not  to  explanation."  2 

Of  course  the  suspension  created  a  great  commotion 
in  the  ranks  of  those  who,  by  this  time,  had  become 
popularly  known  as  Puseyites ;  and  a  great  sensation  was 
produced  throughout  the  country.  An  effort  was  made 
to  obtain  a  reversal  of  the  sentence  by  an  appeal  to  the 
secular  Law  Courts ;  but  it  fell  through.  Then  a  scheme 
was  planned  for  a  friendly  lawsuit,  in  which  one  of 
Pusey's  friends  should  be  prosecutor  and  he  the  defend- 

^  English  Churchman,  January  9,  1845,  P-  ^9- 
^  Ibid.  p.  31. 


"CERTAINLY    NOT    STRAIGHTFORWARD"  233 

ant,  on  a  charge  of  preaching  false  doctrine  in  his  sermon, 
contrary  to  the  teaching  of  the  Church  of  England.  Dr. 
Hook  was  one  of  the  first  to  suggest  this  plan.  "  I  should 
think,"  he  wrote  to  Pusey  on  June  4th,  "you  ought  to 
demand  of  the  Bishop  an  investigation  under  the  Church 
Discipline  Act."  ^  Consultations  with  the  lawyers  took  up 
a  considerable  time,  but  at  length,  on  October  12,  1844, 
seventeen  months  after  the  sermon  was  preached,  Pusey 
wrote  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  announcing  the  proposed 
friendly  prosecution.  "A  friend  of  my  own  (Mr.  Wood- 
gate)  will  apply  to  your  lordship  to  issue  a  Commission  on 
my  printing  a  sermon  which  had  been  already  condemned 
in  the  University.  Had  the  sermon  been  rightly  con- 
demned, this  would  have  been  a  most  grave  offence,  much 
graver  than  preaching  it  originally.  I  do  then  most 
earnestly  implore  your  lordship  not  to  refuse  the  Com- 
mission. I  have  no  anxiety  whatever  about  the  issue  if 
you  grant  it."  ^  It  is,  I  may  here  remark,  wonderful  to 
behold  the  love  for  ecclesiastical  prosecutions  early  mani- 
fested by  the  Puseyites,  when  they  expected  results  satis- 
factory to  themselves.  The  Bishop  of  Oxford,  before 
giving  his  decision,  sought  the  advice  of  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury.  That  prelate  was  strongly  against  the  issue 
of  a  Commission.  He  told  the  Bishop  that  the  Church 
Discipline  Act  gave  him  the  right  to  veto  the  proposed 
prosecution,  and  he  warned  him  against  being  a  party  to 
"a  transaction  of  rather  a  dubious  character,  certainly  not 
straightforward."  3  Acting  on  this  advice,  the  Bishop 
wrote  to  Pusey,  on  November  5th,  declining  to  grant  the 
Commission  asked  for  : — "  I  must  distinctly  state,"  wrote 
the  Bishop,  "that  I  cannot  consent  to  become  a  party  to 
what  I  consider  not  to  be  a  straightforward  proceeding."^ 

It  was  a  great  blow  to  the  Puseyite  party,  but  it  was 
nothing  more  than  they  deserved.  The  sermon  was  dis- 
tinctly contrary  to  the  teaching  of  the  Church  of  England, 
and  it  could  only  rejoice  the  hearts  of  her  avowed  enemies. 
Two  years  later  Newman  pointed  out  that  in  this  sermon, 
out  of  140  texts  of  the  Fathers  cited  by  Pusey,  only  four 

■*  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  349. 

2  Ibid.  p.  357.  3  Ibid.  p.  359.  ^  Ibid.  p.  360. 


2  34  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

were  from  the  Fathers  of  the  first  three  centuries.^  These 
quotations  from  the  Fathers,  together  with  those  from 
Anglican  Divines  cited  in  the  appendix  to  the  sermon,  were 
exhaustive!}''  dealt  wdth,  later  on,  by  the  Rev.  William 
Goode,  in  his  work  on  The  Nature  of  Christ's  Presence  in 
the  Eucharist,  published  in  two  volumes  in  1856.  Of  course, 
Pusey's  sermon  rejoiced  the  Romanists.  At  the  annual 
meeting  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Institute  of  Great  Britain, 
held  on  June  12,  1843,  the  Chairman,  Lord  Camoys, 
said  : — 

"Look  at  the  controversy  now  going  on  in  the  Established  Church, 
especially  at  Oxford.  (Cheers.)  There  was  one  Regius  Professor 
(Dr.  Pusey)  just  condemned  and  suspended  for  having  advocated  the 
doctrine  of  the  Real  Presence  in  the  Eucharist.  .  .  .  He  had  heard 
at  one  of  the  meetings  of  the  Institute  a  hope  expressed  that  they 
(the  Catholics)  might  live  to  see  the  day  when  High  Mass  would 
be  celebrated  in  Westminster  Abbey.  (Tremendous  cheering.)  He 
knew  not  how  probable  such  an  event  might  be,  but  this  they  knew, 
that  the  doctrine  of  the  Mass  had  been  preached  in  the  Cathedral  of 
the  University  of  Oxford — (loud  cheering) — and  it  had  been  autho- 
ritatively declared,  that  if  Dr.  Pusey's  sermon  had  not  been  con- 
demned (as  we  understood  the  noble  lord),  six  or  seven  Colleges  of 
Oxford  University  were  ready  to  have  Mass  said  directly.  (Tre- 
mendous cheering  and  applause.)  There  was,  indeed,  a  very  slender 
barrier  between  Puseyism  and  the  Church  of  Rome."  ^ 

A  curious  clerical  libel  action  was  heard  this  year,  on 
March  25th,  at  Cambridge,  before  Lord  Chief  Justice 
Tindal,  in  which  the  Rev.  Mr.  Belaney  sought  to  recover 
damages  from  the  Rev.  Mr.  Totton,  Rector  of  Debden,  in 
consequence  of  a  libellous  letter  written  by  the  defendant 
concerning  the  plaintiff.  It  appeared  that  Mr.  Belaney  had 
been  employed  by  Mr.  Totton  as  Curate,  and  that  he  had 
altered  the  services  in  a  High  Church  direction.  This 
annoyed  the  Rector  very  much,  and  after  Mr.  Belaney 
had  ceased  to  be  Curate,  he  wrote  the  letter  complained 
of,  in  which  he  said  that  :  "  So  long  as  Mr.  Belaney,  under 
the  influence  of  a  vile  spirit  of  rancour  and  revenge,  con- 
tinued to  visit  the  parish,  and  industriously  fomented  dis- 

^  Life  and  Times  of  Cardinal  Wiseman,  vol.  i.  p.  434, 
"  Catholic  Magazine,  vol.  ii.  for  1843,  pp.  58,  59. 


A    CURIOUS    BRAWLING    CASE  235 

cord,  no  harmony  could  exist;"  and  that  "he  is,  how- 
ever, what  I  always  thought  him,  a  Papist  in  disguise." 
The  jury  gave  a  verdict  for  Mr.  Belaney,  damages  forty 
shillings.^ 

A  singular  case  of  clerical  brawling,  Langley  v.  Burder, 
came  before  the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council  this 
year.  The  Rev.  William  Hawkes  Langley,  Perpetual  Curate 
of  Wheatley,  Oxon.,  was,  in  1841,  prosecuted  by  the  Bishop 
of  Oxford  (through  his  secretary,  Mr.  Burder),  under  the 
Church  Discipline  Act,  for  brawling  in  his  own  Parish 
Church  during  Divine  Service  !  The  case  was  heard  in 
the  Court  of  Arches,  before  Sir  H.  Jenner  Fust.  It  was 
alleged  that,  on  Sunday,  May  9,  1841,  while  conducting 
Divine  Service,  and  shortly  before  the  conclusion  of  the 
Litany,  the  defendant,  "in  a  chiding,  quarrelsome,  and 
brawling  manner,"  addressed  the  congregation,  and  said 
amongst  other  things  : — 

"You  were,  perhaps,  surprised  at  the  pause  I  made  at  the  end  of 
the  prayer,  but  it  reminded  me  of  my  enemies.  I  have  this  morning 
received  a  letter  from  the  Archdeacon,  offering  some  clergyman  to 
do  duty  for  me :  some  one  in  the  congregation  has  had  the  audacity 
to  write  to  the  Archdeacon  on  the  subject.  Who  has  had  the  audacity 
to  do  this  ?  Is  it  a  Puseyite,  who  wants  to  introduce  Popery  into 
the  parish  ?  I  will,  however,  take  care  they  never  shall,  as  I  will  do 
my  duty  myself.  I  have  preached  the  Gospel,  and  delivered  my 
own  soul,  whether  the  people  will  hear,  or  whether  they  will 
forbear." 

Mr.  Langley  then  referred,  in  indignant  terms,  to  certain 
charges  against  his  personal  character,  and  denied  them 
emphatically.  It  was  charged  against  him  that  "during  the 
delivery  of  this  address,  he  was  in  a  very  excited  and  im- 
passioned state,  and  frequently  struck  the  reading  desk 
and  the  books  thereon,  in  a  very  violent  manner,  with  his 
clenched  fist,  and  by  such  improper  and  incorrect  conduct 
gave  great  offence  to  the  congregation  then  assembled  in 
the  church,  and  reflected  scandal  and  disgrace  on  his  sacred 
profession."  One  would  have  thought  that  such  conduct 
might  easily  have  been  dealt  with  by  the  Bishop  outside  of 

^  English  Churchmau,  March  30,  1843,  p.  199. 


236  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Court.  The  fact  that  Bishop  Bagot's  opinions  were  strongly 
in  favour  of  the  Tractarians,  though  he  did  not  go  with 
them  in  every  particular,  might  have  induced  him  to 
abstain  from  prosecuting  a  clergyman  for  a  speech  in 
which  he  attacked  the  Puseyites.  Of  course,  it  was  very 
indiscreet  on  Mr.  Langley's  part  to  be  so  impatient.  He 
might  have  waited  until  he  had  got  into  the  pulpit, 
and  then  have  delivered  it  in  safety  from  a  charge  of 
brawling.  Anyhow,  the  case  was  heard  in  the  Court  of 
Arches — it  was  the  first  case  under  the  new  Church  Dis- 
cipline Act — and  on  June  27,  1842,  Sir  H.  Jenner  Fust 
delivered  judgment.  The  defence  had  been,  he  said,  that 
a  conspiracy  existed  against  Mr.  Langley  amongst  the 
parishioners,  and  that  the  Bishop  was  the  head  of  the 
conspiracy ;  but  he  (the  Judge)  considered  the  defence  an 
aggravation  of  the  offence,  and  therefore  he  sentenced 
Mr.  Langley  to  be  suspended  from  his  living  for  eight 
months,  and  to  pay  the  costs  of  the  case.  It  was  demanded 
by  the  plaintiff  that  Mr.  Langley  should  not  be  readmitted 
to  his  duties  until  he  produced  a  certificate  of  good  be- 
haviour ;  but  this  the  Judge  very  properly  refused  to  grant. 
Mr.  Langley  appealed  against  the  judgment  to  the  Judicial 
Committee  of  Privy  Council,  who,  on  December  4,  1843, 
delivered  judgment,  confirming  the  sentence  against 
him.^ 

I  mention  this  interesting  case  here,  partly  to  show  that 
the  High  Church  party  were  the  first  to  put  the  Church 
Discipline  Act  into  force,  and  also  because  the  general 
question  of  brawling  has  of  late  become  very  prominent 
amongst  us.  I  have  been  unable  to  find  any  proof  against 
the  personal  character  of  Mr.  Langley,  though  it  is  evident 
that  charges  had  been  brought  against  him.  I  believe  that 
if  he  had  been  known  to  be  an  immoral  man,  the  Bishop 
would  have  gone  further,  and  prosecuted  him  on  that 
account.  I  have  no  doubt  that  my  Ritualistic  readers  will 
think  me  uncharitable,  yet  I  cannot  help  expressing  the 
opinion  that  if  Mr.  Langley  had  abstained,  on  that  Sunday 
morning,    from   attacking   the    Puseyites,   he   would   have 

^  Brodrick   and  Freemantle's  Jtidgments  of  the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy 
Council,  pp.  39-43. 


PROTESTS    AGAINST    PUSEYISM  237 

escaped  with  a  private  Episcopal  censure  for  his  conduct. 
Anyhow,  the  sentence  of  suspension  for  eight  months  for 
such  an  offence  was  inexcusably  severe. 

Several  public  protests  against  Puseyism  were  made  by 
Protestant  Churchmen  during  1843.  One  of  these  was  from 
the  inhabitants  of  Blackburn  and  neighbourhood,  and  was 
addressed  to  the  Bishop  of  Chester  (Dr.  John  Bird).  "  We 
feel,"  they  said,  "  ourselves  bound  by  the  ties  both  of  duty 
and  of  gratitude  to  acknowledge  our  lasting  obligations  to 
your  lordship  for  your  firm,  consistent,  and  uncompromis- 
ing resistance  to  the  system  of  those  Tractarian  divines, 
who,  true  to  their  self-assumed  title  of  '  Ecclesiastical 
agitators,'  declare  their  determination  *  to  intrude  upon  the 
peace  of  the  contented,  and  raise  doubts  in  the  minds  of  the 
uncomplaining  ;  vex  the  Church  with  controversy,  alarm 
serious  men,  and  interrupt  the  established  order  of  things ; 
set  the  father  against  the  son,  and  the  mother  against  the 
daughter.'  "  In  replying  to  this  address  of  protest  against 
Puseyism,  the  Bishop  of  Chester  wrote  : — "  I  rejoice  in  the 
proof  it  affords  that  the  principles  established  by  our 
Reformers  are  dear  to  so  many  hearts ;  that  so  many  in 
whose  spiritual  welfare  I  am  concerned  regard  with  just 
horror  any  departure  from  the  'truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus'; 
whether  it  be  by  the  way  of  return  to  exploded  errors,  or 
under  the  insidious  pretence  of  development  of  undis- 
covered mystery."  1  An  address  from  the  inhabitants  of 
Bolton  was  also  sent  to  the  Bishop  of  Chester,  protesting 
against  *'  the  evil  spirit  and  false  doctrines  "  of  the  Puseyites. 
An  address  to  the  Vice-Chancellor  and  Heads  of  Houses  in 
Oxford  was  adopted  at  a  meeting,  over  which  Lord  Ashley 
presided,  and  was  subsequently  signed  largely,  in  which 
"an  earnest  hope  "  was  expressed  "that  the  authorities  of 
the  University  will  take  such  steps  as  are  by  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  whole  body  and  of  the  several  Colleges  open  to 
them,  for  protecting  the  youth  committed  to  their  care 
from  the  dangerous  [anti- Protestant]  influence  to  which  we 
have  referred,  and  for  securing  to  them  for  the  future  only 
such    tuition    as   is    in    strict    accordance   with   the    prin- 

^  English  Churchman,  October  5,  1843,  P-  627. 


238  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

ciples  of  the  Protestant  Church  and  Constitution  of  these 
realms."  ^ 

In  this  year  protests  from  parishioners  against  altera- 
tions made  in  the  mode  of  conducting  Divine  Service  by 
Puseyite  clergymen  became  somewhat  numerous.  The 
English  Churchman  newspaper  was  started  by  the  Puseyites 
on  January  5,  1843,  and  soon  its  columns  were  filled  with 
discussions  and  comments  on  such  subjects  as  Altar  Cover- 
ings, Alternate  Chanting,  Black  Letter  Saints,  Christian 
Ceremonial,  Copes,  Crosses  on  the  Altar,  Decoration  of 
Churches,  Fast  Days,  Font  Covers,  Oblations  in  the  Euch- 
arist, Position  of  the  Celebrant  Priest,  Reserve,  and  Stone 
Altars,  thus  affording  to  the  public  a  clear  proof  of  the 
advance  of  Puseyism  in  a  Romeward  direction.  The 
English  Churchman  still  continues  to  be  published,  but  it 
no  longer  advocates  the  Sacerdotal  cause.  It  has  become 
the  most  outspoken  of  all  papers  against  Ritualism. 

During  1843  Newman  made  rapid  strides  in  the  direc- 
tion of  Rome.  Early  in  the  year  he  withdrew  whatever  he 
had  written  against  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  expressed 
his  regret  for  having  so  written.  He  told  his  friend  Mr.  J. 
R.  Hope-Scott,  as  we  have  already  seen,  with  reference  to 
this  act,  that  he  had  "to  eat  a  few  dirty  words." ^  On 
August  30th  Newman  wrote  to  a  lady  : — "  We  shall  not 
leave  the  Church  as  others  may.  We  have  no  longings 
for  Rome''  ^  Only  two  days  later  he  wrote  a  letter, 
marked  "  Confidential,"  to  the  Rev.  J.  B.  Mozley,  an- 
nouncing his  forthcoming  resignation  of  the  living  of  St. 
Mary's,  Oxford,  and  adding  : — "The  truth  then  is,  I  am  not 
a  good  son  enough  of  the  Church  of  England  to  feel  I 
can  in  conscience  hold  preferment  under  her.  /  love  the 
Church  of  Rome  too  well.  Now  please  burn  this^  there's  a 
good  fellow,  for  you  sometimes  let  letters  lie  on  your 
mantelpiece."*  Four  weeks  later  Newman  wrote  to  his 
sister,  on  September  29th  : — "  I  do  so  despair  of  the  Church 
of  England,  and  am  so  evidently  cast  off  by  her,  and,  on 

^  English  Churchman,  July  27,  1843,  P-  ^^1- 

*  Memoirs  of  James  Hope- Scot  f,  vol.  ii.  p.  19. 
^  Newman's  Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  421. 

*  Ibid.  p.  423. 


"I    AM    NOT    TO    BE    TRUSTED"  239 

the  other  hand,  I  am  so  drawn  to  the  Chitxh  of  Rome  y  that 
I  think  it  safer,  as  a  matter  of  honesty,  not  to  keep  my 
Hving.  This  is  a  very  different  thing  from  having  any  in- 
tention  of  joining  the  Church  of  Rome."^  With  such  views 
most  people  would  have  been  of  the  opinion  that  the  only 
"  honest  "  course  would  have  been  to  have  joined  the 
Church  of  Rome  at  once.  But  he  remained  in  the  Church 
of  England  for  another  two  years,  "  loving  the  Church  of 
Rome  "  all  the  time,  and  with  "  despair  "  in  his  heart  con- 
cerning the  Church  of  England.  Indeed,  as  early  as 
October  25,  1843,  he  declared: — "I  think  the  Church  of 
Rome  the  Catholic  Church,  and  ours  not  part  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  because  not  in  communion  with  Rome."  2 
In  accordance  with  this  inconsistent  position  he  told  the 
Rev.  J.  B.  Mozley,  on  November  24th  : — "  I  am  now  pub- 
Hshing  sermons,  which  speak  more  confidently  about  our 
position  than  I  inwardly  feel,  but  I  think  it  right  and  do 
not  care  for  seeming  inconsistent."  ^  Six  weeks  later 
Newman  wrote  to  the  Rev.  T.  W.  Allies  : — "  I  will  say  to 
you,  what  the  occasion  makes  me  say,  but  which  I  should 
not  like  repeated  as  from  me,  that  I  am  not  to  be  trusted. 
Others  say  this  freely ;  but  I  feel  it  myself  too  certainly, 
though  it  is  not  well  openly  to  profess  it."  *  Newman  re- 
signed the  living  of  St.  Mary's  on  September  i6th,  and 
removed  to  Littlemore,  the  Vicarage  of  which  he  retained, 
however,  only  for  a  short  time,  and  then  he  retired  into  lay 
communion.  On  September  25th  he  preached  at  Little- 
more  the  sermon  on  "  The  Parting  of  Friends,"  which  has 
generally  been  considered  a  kind  of  farewell  to  the  Church 
of  England.  The  story  of  the  Littlemore  Monastery,  which 
at  this  period  was  in  full  operation,  I  have  related  else- 
where.'^ 

The  opinion  which  Archdeacon  Samuel  Wilberforce 
had  this  year  formed  of  Puseyism  and  the  Romeward 
Movement,  may  profitably  be  quoted  here.  Writing  to  his 
brother  Henry,  on  August  18,   1843,  about  a  Curate,  he 

1  Newman's  Lette7-s,  vol.  ii.  p.  425. 

^  Newman's  Apologia,  p.  351. 

3  Newman'  Letters,  vol.  ii.  p.  430. 

*  A  Life's  Decision.     By  T.  W.  Allies,  2nd  edition,  p.  41.     London :  1894. 

®  Secret  History  of  the  Oxford  Movement,  chap.  i. 


240  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

said  : — ''  It  is  so  likely  that  he  has  been  misrepresented,  so 
likely  that  preaching,  it  may  be  injudiciously,  against  what 
with  him  I  think  the  perils  of  our  Church  from  the  insane  love 
of  Rome  y  which  has  possessed  many  of  the  followers  of  the 
Tract  Movement."  ^  "  For  you  must,"  continued  the 
Archdeacon,  "remember,  dearest  H.,  that  your  own  feel- 
ings are  here  a  bad  guide.  You  must  remember  that  men 
who,  like  myself,  are  not  Low  Churchmen,  that  even  we 
feel  in  the  very  centre  of  our  hearts  that  the  greatest  veri- 
ties of  the  intier  Christian  life  are  absolutely  perilled  by  the 
Tract  system^ 

The  Tractarians  were  made  very  uncomfortable  this 
year  by  an  exposure  of  their  Romanising  work  by  one 
who  up  to  that  time  they  had  considered  as  one  of  their 
own  leaders — the  Rev.  William  Palmer,  of  Worcester  Col- 
lege, Oxford.  Mr.  Palmer  was  one  of  the  first  to  join  the 
Oxford  Movement,  and  therefore  the  pamphlet  he  wrote 
on  the  subject  naturally  created  a  sensation.  It  was  en- 
titled : — A  Narrative  of  Events  Connected  with  the  Publication 
of  "  The  Tracts  for  the  Times,"  With  Reflections  on  Existing 
Tendencies  to  Romanism.'^  In  issuing  this  pamphlet,  Mr. 
Palmer  withdrew  none  of  the  opinions  on  Church  govern- 
ment and  doctrine  which  he  had  previously  held ;  nor  did 
he  in  any  way  censure  the  Tracts  for  the  Times  ;  but  he  saw 
clearly  that  a  party  had  arisen  within  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land bent  on  leading  her  to  Rome,  and  in  his  pamphlet  he 
proved  this  by  numerous  quotations  from  the  writings  of  the 
advanced  section,  more  especially  from  the  British  Critic ; 
and  he  even  went  so  far  as  to  declare  that  there  were  those 
amongst  them  who  "  look  on  the  Papal  Supremacy,  the 
Invocation  of  Saints,  &c.,  as  Divinely  instituted."  ^ 

"  The  07ily  difficulty,"  wrote  Mr.  Palmer,  "  with  which  those 
who  uphold  Church  principles  have  had  to  contend,  is  the  imputa- 
tion of  a  tendency  to  Popery.  The  continual  assertion  of  our 
opponents  of  all  kinds  has  been,  that  Romanism  is  the  legitimate 

^  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberfone,  vol.  i.  p.  28S. 

^  It  was  republished  by  the  author  in  1S83,  with  a  lengthy  Introduction  and 
Supplement.     London :  Rivingtons. 

3  Narrative  of  Events  Connected  with  the  Tracts  for  the  Time's,  3rd  edition 
p.  64.     Oxford  :  Parker.     1843. 


PROGRESS    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT  24 1 

conclusion  of  our  principles,  Romanists,  Dissenters,  Latitudin- 
arians,  and  many  others  have  reiterated  the  assertion,  till  the  world 
is  nearly  persuaded  of  its  truth.  But  what  can  we  say — what  de- 
fence can  be  made,  when  it  is  undeniable  that  Romanising  in  its  very 
fullest  extent^  has  advocates  amongst  ourselves ;  that  they  have  in- 
fluence in  the  British  Critic ;  that  they  are  on  terms  of  intimacy 
and  confidence  with  leading  men ;  that  no  public  protest  is  entered 
against  their  proceedings  by  the  advocates  of  Church  principles  ?  It 
is  the  conviction  of  the  necessity  of  making  some  attempt,  however 
feeble,  to  arrest  an  intolerable  evil,  which  has  induced  me  to  publish 
this  narrative  of  our  proceedings."  ^ 

Yet,  after  all,  though  Mr.  Palmer  could  not  see  it,  the 
Romanising  teaching  against  which  he  protested,  was  but  the 
natural  development  of  the  sacerdotal  teaching  of  the  Tracts 
for  the  Times.  Mr.  Palmer's  testimony  against  his  former 
friends  is,  however,  all  the  stronger,  as  coming  from  one 
who  himself  was  a  High  Churchman  of  a  decided  type. 
The  Oxford  Movement  made  rapid  progress  towards  Rome 
in  1843. 

But  still  more  rapid  was  the  progress  in  1844.  It  was 
in  this  year  that  Dr.  Pusey  commenced  the  publication  of 
Roman  Catholic  books  of  devotion,  **  Adapted  to  the  Use  of 
the  English  Church."  He  had  an  idea  of  translating  the 
Breviary,  but  only  a  few  small  portions  were  circulated. 
He  asked  Newman's  advice  about  it.  That  astute  man  at 
once  saw  how  it  would  help  the  Church  of  Rome.  "  I  am," 
he  wrote  to  Pusey,  "  quite  of  opinion  that  any  Breviary, 
however  corrected,  &c.,  will  tend  to  prepare  minds  for  the 
Church  of  Rome.  I  fully  think  you  will  be  doing  so  by 
your  publication  ...  I  do  not  think  our  system  will  bear 
it.  It  is  like  sewing  a  new  piece  of  cloth  on  an  old  garment. 
Did  I  wish  to  promote  the  cause  of  the  Church  of  Rome, 
I  should  say,  Do  what  you  propose  to  do."  ^  The  Rev. 
W.  K.  Hamilton  (afterwards  Bishop  of  Salisbury),  High 
Churchman  though  he  was,  viewed  Pusey's  adapted  books 
with  alarm,  and  wrote  to  tell  him  that  they  tended  to  foster 
an  unlilial  spirit  in  members  of  the  Church  of  England.^ 
Archdeacon  Samuel  Wilberforce  disliked  them  exceedingly. 

■^  Palmer's  Narrative  of  Events  Connected  with  the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  pp. 
69,  70. 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  390.  ^  Ibid.  p.  394. 

Q 


242  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

He  wrote  on  April  4,  1844  : — "  I  opened  yesterday  Pusey's 
translation  (just  out)  of  Avrillon's  mode  of  keeping  Lent, 
with  an  introduction  by  Pusey.  I  think  it  fuller  of  sad  and 
humiliating  bits  of  superstition  than  anything  of  his  I  have 
yet  seen."  ^  Dr.  Hook  was  indignant,  and  declared  that  one 
effect  of  these  adapted  works  would  be  that  they  "  will  make 
men  decided  infidels."  -  It  may  be  useful  if  we  here  give 
extracts  from  some  of  these  adapted  Romish  books,  and 
from  the  prefaces  Pusey  wrote  to  them,  as  justifying  the 
dislike  to  them  felt  and  expressed,  not  only  by  Evangelical 
Churchmen,  but  by  High  Churchmen  also  : — 

"  For  both  the  large  heads,  under  which  these  and  the  like  wants 
would  fall — contemplation  and  self-discipline — the  spiritual  writers 
of  Foreign  Churches  have,  as  yet,  some  obvious  advantages  over  our 
own  ;  for  the  discipline  and  knowledge  of  self,  through  that  know- 
ledge of  the  human  heart  which  results //-(?;//  habitual  confession  ;  for 
contemplation,  in  the  Monastic  Orders,  as  joining,  in  all  cases,  con- 
templation and  mental  prayer  with  charity  and  mortification."^ 

'*  He  who  hears  the  word  of  God  without  attention,  and  without 
respect,  is  not  less  guilty  than  he  who  by  carelessness  should  allow 
the  Body  of  Jesus  Christ  to  fall  to  the  ground."* 

"  The  most  perfect  Christians  consecrate  themselves  to  God  in  a 
Religious  State  only,  that  they  may  be  the  more  separated  from  the 
world."  5 

"  In  vain  do  we  strive  to  obtain  heaven,  and  to  expiate,  by  our 
repentance,  the  sins  of  which  we  have  been  guilty,  if  we  are  not 
assisted  by  Thy  grace.  We  acknowledge  our  weakness ;  but  we 
know  also  that  we  can  do  all  in  Him  who  strengtheneth  us.  It  is 
Thou  alone  who  canst  give  to  our  labours  and  our  fasts  the  accept- 
ableness  which  they  need  in  order  to  appease  Thy  wrath,  to  efface  our 
sin,  to  draw  down  upon  us  Thy  mercy,  and  to  obtain  eternal  life, 
which  we  hope  for  through  the  merits  of  Jesus  Christ."  ^ 

"The  rebellion  of  the  body  must  be  mortified  by  fasts.  Disci- 
plines, Hair  Shirts,  vigils,  and  other  similar  austerities,  as  discretion 
and  obedience  may  teach." '^ 

"  Never  resist  the  will  of  thy  Superiors,  but  show  them  a  ready 
obedience,  executing  promptly  all  their  commands,  and  with  most 

^  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  i.  p.  236. 

-  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  431. 

^  Avrillon's  Guide  to  Passing  Lent  Holily,  Pusey's  Preface,  p.  xi. 

^  Ibid.  p.  270.  6  Ibid.  p.  282.  «  Ibid.  p.  278. 

''  Scupoli's  Spiritual  Combat,  p.  48. 


PUSEY'S  adapted  ROMAN  ROOKS         243 

willingness  such  as  humble  thee,  and  are  most  opposed  to  thy  natural 
will  and  inclination."  ^ 

"  Appearing  once  in  the  form  of  an  infant  to  one  of  His  pure 
and  devoted  creatures,  she  asked  Him  [Jesus]  with  great  simplicity  to 
recite  the  Angelical  Salutation.  He  readily  began  :  '  Hail  Mary,  full  of 
grace,  the  Lord  is  with  Thee,  blessed  art  thou  among  women,'  and  then 
stopped,  being  unwilling  to  praise  Himself,  in  the  words  that  follow."  ^ 

"  Before  Communion  (whatever  be  our  object  in  receiving  It)  we 
must  cleanse  and  purify  ourselves,  if  stained  with  mortal  sin,  in  the 
Sacrament  of  Penance."  ^ 

*'  Then  as  the  time  of  Communion  approaches,  think  What  it  is 
thou  art  about  to  receive  !  The  Son  of  God,  of  Majesty  Incom- 
prehensible, before  Whom  the  Heavens  and  all  the  powers  therein 
do  tremble.  The  Holy  of  Holies,  the  Spotless  Mirror,  and  the 
Incomprehensible  Purity,  beside  Whom  no  creature  is  clean.  .  .  . 
Thou  art  {I  say)  about  to  receive  God,  in  Whose  Hand  are  the  life 
and  death  of  the  whole  Universe."  * 

"  When,  thyself,  about  to  communicate,  enliven  thy  faith  to  see 
under  the  accidents  of  the  consecrated  elements,  the  true  Lamb  of 
God  that  taketh  away  sins."  ^ 

^^  By  the  law  of  God  we  mean  all  that  is  contained  in  the  Deca- 
logue, and  all  ordinances  emanating  from  a  legitimate  power, 
whether  written,  or  authorised  and  confirmed  by  custom.  We 
comprehend  also  the  statutes  and  general  regulations  7nade  by  prelates 
and  ecclesiastical  superiors."  ^ 

"  Happy,  at  least,  is  it,  if  they  who  think  they  hold  most  accu- 
rately the  corruption  of  nature,  can  even  understand  the  language  of 
the  self-abhorrence  of  Saints.  Take  ...  his  who  ever  prayed  that 
his  sins  might  not  bring  the  vengeance  of  God  on  the  towns  where 
he  preached  ['  St.  Dominic,'  Founder  of  the  Inquisition  which  slew 
the  Saints  of  God] ;  or  of  those  who  wept  for  their  sins,  until  sight 
was  impaired  ['St.  Francis  of  Assisium  and  St.  Ignatius  Loyola,' 
the  latter  being  the  founder  of  the  Jesuits] ;  or  his,  who,  having 
renounced  all  the  riches  and  glories  of  this  world,  habitually  ac- 
counted his  only  fit  dwelling  to  be  hell,  or  being  spit  upon  all  night, 
counted  no  place  fitter  than  his  own  face  ['St.  Francis  Borgia,'  a 
Jesuit.]"  7 

"  And  now,  in  our  entire  ignorance  of  its  very  nature,  the  name 
oi^ the  Rosary''  or  ^ Beads^  is  associated  only  with  ideas  of  super- 

^  Scupoli's  Spiritual  Combat,  p.  47. 

2  Ibid.  p.  89.  3  Ibid.  p.  134. 

*  Ibid.  p.  141.  8  Ibid.  p.  190. 

®  The  Foundations  of  the  Spiritual  Life.     By  F.  Surin,  a  Jesuit  Priest,  p.  202. 

'  Ibid.,  Pusey's  Preface,  pp.  xix.,  xx. 


344  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

stition,  even  in  minds  who,  if  they  knew  it,  would  be  shocked  at 
their  own  thoughts."  ^ 

*'  It  is  almost  the  inevitable  consequence  of  such  compendious 
or  arbitrary  selections  or  substitutions  of  doctrine,  as  of  '  Justifica- 
tion by  Faith,'  or  even  'The  Atonement'  for  'Christ  Crucified,' 
that  in  the  end  they  contract  men's  faith."  ^ 

"After  the  use  of  the  Exerciiia  Spiritualia  of  St.  Ignatius 
[Loyola]  had  been  introduced  into  Portugal  (among  other  countries) 
with  a  wonderful  change  of  life,  it  was  reported  in  Coimbra  that 
those  who  made  these  holy  retreats  had  strange  visions,  which  led 
them  to  extraordinary  fervour."  ^ 

"  The  Manuel  des  Confesseicrs,  is  a  ?nost  valuable  digest  of  the 
judgments  of  some  of  the  most  experienced  Confessors  of  the 
Church,  and  of  the  greatest  use,  whether  in  the  receiving  of  Con- 
fessions, or  the  more  ordinary  spiritual  ministrations."* 

"Christ — That  thou  mayest  be  more  fully  restored  to  My 
favour  after  thus  confessing  thy  unrighteousness  to  Me,  go  and  show 
thyself  also  to  the  Priest,  to  whom  I  have  given  the  power  of  binding 
and  of  loosing.  Whoso  hideth  his  wickednesses  shall  not  be  put  right, 
but  he  that  confesses  and  forsakes  them  shall  obtain  mercy.  My 
son,  be  not  ashamed  to  tell  the  truth  for  thy  soul's  sake.  There  is 
a  shame  that  bringeth  sin,  and  there  is  a  shame  that  bringeth  glory. 
Open,  then,  thy  conscience  frankly  and  sincerely  to  him  who  is  in 
My  Stead,  and  he  shall  open  Heaven  to  thee.  .  .  .  Master  this 
preposterous  shame ;  humble  thyself  before  My  Priest,  whom  I  have 
appointed  in  My  Place,  as  My  Ambassador,  and  thy  counsellor  and 
physician.    Declare  thy  wickednesses,  that  thou  mayest  be  justified."  ^ 

"We  pray  Thee,  also,  O  Lord,  Holy  Father,  for  the  souls  of  the 
faithful  departed,  especially — that  this  great  Sacrament  of  Thy  Love 
may  be  to  them  salvation,  joy,  and  refreshment.''  ^ 

I  have  given  a  great  deal  of  space  to  these  extracts  from 
Dr.  Pusey's  adapted  Roman  Catholic  works,  on  the  title 
page  of  each  of  which  was  printed  the  words  : — "  Adapted 
to  the  Use  of  the  English  Church,"  because  he  who  was 
responsible  for  them  became,  at  about  this  time,  and  con- 

^  The  Foundations  of  the  Spiritual  Life,  Pusey's  Preface,  p.  xxvi. 

2  Ibid.  p.  xxix.  *  Ibid.  p.  liii.  note. 

*  Ibid.  p.  Ivi.  note.  The  book  which  Pusey  thus  highly  commended,  without  any 
qualification,  was  one  of  the  most  filthy  of  all  the  filthy  Confessional  books  pub- 
lished in  the  Roman  Church.  When  Pusey  translated  it  in  1878,  he  left  out  the 
filthy  reading  as  unsuited  for  English  Confessors'  circumstances,  but  he  did  not 
condemn  the  thing  itself. 

^  Horst's  Faiadise  for  the  Christian  Soul,  vol.  i.  part  iii.  pp.  15-17-  There 
seems  something  fearfully  wicked  in  placing  such  words  in  the  Saviour's  mouth,  as 
though  Confession  to  Him  were  not  sufficient.  ^  Ibid.  vol.  ii.  part  v.  p.  126. 


WHAT    THE    POPE    SAID    ABOUT    PUSEY  245 

tinued  until  his  death,  the  acknowledged  leader  of  what  I 
must  term  the  Romeward  Movement  in  the  Church  of 
England.  These  citations  show  most  clearly  how  far  Pusey 
had  already  gone  in  Popery  and  superstition,  and  whither 
he  was  leading  his  deluded  disciples.  These  adapted  Popish 
works  had  a  very  large  circulation,  and  undoubtedly  did 
much  to  lead  many  to  Rome.  There  was  much  of  truth 
in  what  Pope  Pius  IX.  said  of  Pusey,  in  an  interview  with  the 
Rev.  A.  P.  Stanley  (the  future  Dean  of  Westminster)  in 
1866.     In  relating  the  interview  Dean  Stanley  says  : — 

"He  [the  Pope]  finally  said,  'You  know  Pusey,  When  you 
meet  him,  give  him  this  message  from  me — that  I  compare  him  to  a 
bell,  which  always  sounds  to  invite  the  faithful  to  Church,  and  itself 
always  remains  outside.'"^ 

The  High  Church  Bishop  of  London  (Dr.  Blomfield)  in 
his  Charge,  delivered  in  1846,  referred  to,  amongst  others 
of  the  same  class,  these  adapted  Roman  books  of  Pusey's — 
though  he  did  not  mention  Pusey  by  name.     He  said  : — 

"  I  confess  that  I  cannot  understand  how  any  person,  professing 
to  be  a  member  of  our  branch  of  the  Church  Catholic,  can  reconcile 
it  to  his  conscience  to  be  in  any  way  accessory  to  proceedings  the 
effect  of  which,  upon  th:  minds  of  those  who  are  imperfectly  in- 
structed, must  be  to  diminish  the  seeming  importance  of  those 
fundamental  differences  which  separate  the  Churches  of  England  and 
Rome ;  to  make  them  dissatisfied  with  the  doctrine  and  discipline  of 
the  one,  and  to  habituate  them  to  regard  with  complacency,  and  in 
due  time  with  affection,  the  worst  errors  of  the  other.  I  can  under- 
stand this  conduct  on  the  part  of  one  of  that  Society  to  whom  it  is 
permitted  to  disguise  their  real  sentiments,  and  to  assume  any 
character  which  best  enables  them  to  propagate  the  errors  of  Rome; 
but  I  cannot  comprehend  the  self-delusion  by  which  any  person 
pursuing  this  course  can  persuade  himself  that  he  is  faithful  to  his 
solemn  engagements  as  a  clergyman  of  the  English  Church.  I 
cannot  but  regard  such  a  policy  as  more  to  be  censured  and  feared 
than  open,  honest,  undisguised  hostihty."^ 

During  the  year  1844  the  Puseyites  manifested  an 
intense  desire  to  expel  some  of  their  opponents  from  the 
Church  of  England  by  means  of  ecclesiastical  prosecutions. 

^  Life  of  Dean  Stanley,  vol.  ii.  p.  358. 

2  Memoir  of  Bishop  Blomfield,  vol.  ii.  pp.  75,  76. 


246  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Their  chief  organ,  the  English  Churchman^  was  very  ener- 
getic in  this  direction.  Some  correspondents  of  that  paper 
started  a  discussion  on  this  subject  early  in  the  year,  in 
consequence  of  a  clerical  Declaration  in  favour  of  Protestant 
principles  which  had  just  been  issued.  With  reference  to 
this  Declaration  one  of  them  wrote:  —  "It  is  their  [the 
Bishops']  business  to  punish  heresy,  it  is  ours  [the  laity]  to 
bring  it  under  their  notice.  Let  us,  in  vindication  of  our 
Mother's  honour,  now  act  on  this  principle.  If  the  ob- 
noxious document  be  really  published  in  any  official  way, 
let  a  fund  be  immediately  raised,  and  a  committee  named, 
for  the  purpose  of  proceeding  in  the  Ecclesiastical  Courts 
against  the  principal  signer — say  the  senior  D.D.  or  the  first 
of  that  rank  on  the  list — for  heresy.  I  am  very  ignorant  of 
ecclesiastical  law  ;  but  of  course  the  first  step  would  be  to 
take  counsel's  advice  as  to  the  proper  mode  of  proceeding."^ 
A  month  later  another  correspondent  wrote  : — "  I  am  pre- 
pared to  raise  contributions,  from  clerical  friends  and 
others,  with  a  view  to  share  the  expense  of  bringing  to 
justice,  in  our  Ecclesiastical  Courts,  those  unfaithful 
Ministers  of  the  Church  who  have  in  their  late  public 
Declaration  proclaimed  themselves  heretics."  ^  The  De- 
claration actually  contained  not  a  word  of  heresy  from 
beginning  to  end,  but  a  strong  affirmation  of  Protestant 
doctrines  such  as  any  Evangelical  clergyman  of  the  present 
day  would  gladly  sign.  But  it  denied  the  Puseyite  theory 
of  Baptismal  Regeneration,  Apostolical  Succession,  and  a 
Sacerdotal  Priesthood,  and  afBrmed  the  doctrine  of  Jus- 
tification by  Faith  only,  and  that  the  Bible  alone  is  the 
sole  and  only  Rule  of  Faith.^  It  was  very  largely  signed, 
and  if  the  Puseyites  could  have  had  their  own  way  those 
who  signed  it  would  soon  have  been  deprived  of  their 
livings  and  curacies. 

Towards  the  close  of  September  it  was  publicly  an- 
nounced in  Exeter  that  two  Church  of  England  clergymen, 
the  Rev.  H.  Bulteel,  formerly   Fellow  of  Exeter  College, 

^  English  Churchman,  February  i,  1844,  p.  74. 
'  Ibid.  March  7,  1844,  p.  153. 

3  See  the  document  in  full  in  ihe  English  Churchman,  January  25,   1844, 
pp.  59,  60. 


PROPOSED  PROSECUTION  OF  EVANGELICALS    247 

Oxford,  and  the  Rev.  J.  Shore,  M.A.,  would  preach  at  the 
opening  of  the  "  Episcopal  Free  Church "  in  that  city. 
Thereupon  the  English  Churchman  furiously  demanded  a 
prosecution  of  these  clergymen.  "The  intended  schismati- 
cal  proceedings  announced  in  the  following  advertisement 
show  the  necessity  of  formally  and  ecclesiastically  depriving 
the  rebellious  clergy,  so  that  there  may  no  longer  be  any 
doubt  as  to  whether  they  do  or  do  not  belong  to  us.  .  .  . 
We  trust  that  the  Lord  Bishop  of  Exeter  will  set  an  ex- 
ample to  his  brethren,  and  will  proceed  canonically  against 
those  of  his  clergy  who  refuse  to  conform  to  the  rules  of 
the  Church."  ^  A  month  later  the  English  Churchman  de- 
voted a  whole  leading  article  to  this  subject,  and  declared  : 
— "To  speak  plainly,  we  desire,  most  earnestly  and  respect- 
fully, to  impress  upon  their  lordships  the  Bishops,  the 
important  fact,  that  by  allowing  palpable  heresy  to  be 
publicly  preached  and  published,  without  public  and  per- 
sonal censure  of  the  offender,  they  are  extensively  alienating 
the  confidence  and  attachment  of  some  most  valuable  men 
in  the  Church.  A  jealous  vigilance  to  detect  the  slightest 
appearance  of  heresy,  and  the  prompt  punishment  of 
heretical  teachers,  have  ever  been  among  the  most  visible 
notes  of  the  Catholic  Church."  -  Not  a  word  of  denuncia- 
tion was  heard,  from  these  Puseyite  lovers  of  prosecution, 
against  the  "  State  Courts,"  or  their  interference  with  the 
Church,  and  I  am  convinced  that  if  they  had  only  consented 
to  interpret  the  law  as  the  Puseyites  desired,  their  modern 
successors,  the  Ritualists,  would  have  been,  on  the  whole, 
quite  content  with  things  as  they  are.  In  that  case  there 
would  not,  by  this  time,  have  been  left  a  Protestant  clergy- 
man in  the  Church  of  England.  They  would  have  been 
deprived  of  their  livings  long  ago  as  so  many  heretics. 

The  High  Church  Bishop  of  Exeter  was  ready  enough 
to  put  pressure  on  the  Evangelical  clergy  of  his  Diocese. 
On  November  19th  he  issued  a  Pastoral  Letter  on  "  Ob- 
servance of  the  Rubric  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer," 
in  which  he  urged  a  stricter  observance  of  the  Rubrics ; 
and  ordered  all  his  clergy  to  wear  the  surplice  in  preaching. 

^  English  Churchman,  September  26,  1844,  p.  613. 
*  Ibid,  October  24,  1844,  p.  677. 


248  HISTORY    OP"    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

"The  law,"  said  the  Bishop,  "beyond  all  question  which  can 
now  arise,  requires  that  the  surplice  be  always  used  in  the  sermon, 
which  is  part  of  the  Communion  Service ;  and  as  to  all  other  times, 
whenever  a  sermon  is  part  of  the  ministration  of  the  parochial 
clergy,  there  is  so  little  reason  for  question,  that  I  resolve  the 
doubt  by  requiring  that  the  surplice  be  always  used."^ 

The  opposition  to  the  use  of  the  surplice  in  the  pulpit 
was,  however,  too  strong  for  the  Bishop,  who,  within  five 
weeks  from  issuing  it,  had  to  withdraw  his  order.  He  had 
issued  an  illegal  order,  founded  on  a  mistaken  interpreta- 
tion of  the  law.  The  Black  Gown  in  the  pulpit  is  strictly 
legal.  In  the  case  of  Robinson  Wj-ight  v.  Tugwell,  judg- 
ment was  given  in  the  Court  of  Appeal  on  November  28, 
1896,  by  Lord  Justice  Smith,  who  said  : — 

"The  'warrant  in  law'  for  the  Black  Gown  is  constant  use  for 
centuries.  Inasmuch  as  no  positive  law  exists,  and  no  objection 
against  the  legality  of  the  Black  Gown  in  the  pulpit,  which  has 
ranged  over  three  hundred  years,  can  be  found,  and  there  is  no 
decision  that  its  use  is  illegal,  I  agree  with  what  I  understand  Mr. 
Justice  North  to  have  held,  that  its  use  is  not  illegal."  ^ 

The  principal  ecclesiastical  event  in  1844  was  the  pub- 
lication by  the  Rev.  W.  G.  Ward  of  his  Ideal  of  a  Christian 
Church,  in  which  he  declared  that  he  subscribed  the  Thirty- 
Nine  Articles  "in  a  non-natural  sense,"  and  that  in  doing 
so  he  "  renounced  no  one  Roman  doctrine."  **  We  find," 
he  exclaimed,  "oh  most  joyful,  most  wonderful,  most 
unexpected  sight  !  We  find  the  whole  cycle  of  Roman 
doctrine  gradually  possessing  numbers  of  English  Church- 
men." I  have  given  elsewhere  ^  a  brief  history  of  the 
controversy  which  arose  out  of  this  publication,  and  there- 
fore I  need  say  no  more  about  it  here,  except  to  give  below 
a  list  of  the  leading  publications  relating  to  it.* 

1  English  Churchman,  December  5,  1844,  p.  769. 

^  The  Lord  Chief  Justice  of  England  and  Lord  Justice  Lindley  agreed  in  this 
judgment,  the  text  of  which  is  printed  in  the  Church  Intelligencer,  January  1897, 
pp.  5,  6. 

^  Secret  History  of  the  Oxford  Movement,  chap.  ix. 

*  I.  The  Ideal  of  a  Christian  Church.  By  the  Rev.  W.  G.  Ward,  M.A.,  2nd 
edition,  pp.  xiv.,  600.     London  :  James  Toovey.     1844. 

2.  Selections  from  a  Work  entitled  "  The  Ideal  of  a  Christian  Church,"  Illus- 
trative of  its  Tendency  to  Promote  Dutifulness  to  the  English  Church,  pp.  24. 
London  :  Toovey.     1S44. 


PUSEYITE    OPPOSITION    TO    DR.    SYMONS  249 

At  the  beginning  of  the  Michaelmas  Term,  1844,  Dr. 
Wynter's  term  of  office  as  Vice-Chancellor  expired.  The 
next  in  order  of  succession  was  Dr.  Symons,  Warden  of 
Wadham  College.  Now  Dr.  Symons  was  a  very  decided 
Protestant,  whose  opposition  to  the  Oxford  Movement  was 
very  well  known  ;  and  besides  all  this  he  was  one  of  the 
Six  Doctors  who  had  condemned  Dr.  Pusey,  the  previous 
year,  for  his  sermon  on  The  Holy  Eucharist  a  Comfort  to  the 
Penitent.  This  last  offence  could  not  possibly  be  forgiven 
by  Pusey's  friends,  who  determined  to  show  their  vindic- 
tiveness  by  opposing  the  election  of  Dr.  Symons  as  Vice- 
Chancellor.  Pusey  was  very  zealous  in  the  new  campaign 
against  Symons.  "  I  use  no  concealment  now,"  he  wrote 
to  his  brother,  "if  ever  I  did,  that  I  think  Dr.  S.[ymons] 
ought  to  be  opposed  as  a  protest  against  heresy  and  here- 
tical decisions.  If  the  University  accepted  him  without  a 
protest,  it  seemed  like  making  itself  a  party  to  it."^  A 
prominent  member  of  the  Tractarian  party  wrote  to  the 
English  Churchman,  over  the  signature  "N.  E.  S." : — "It 
does  then  seem  to  me,  what  I  have  all  along  made  it,  a 

3.  An  Address  to  Members  of  Convocation  In  Protest  against  the  Proposed 
'Statute.     By  the  Rev.  W.  G.  Ward,  M.A.,  pp.  56.     London  :  Toovey.     1845. 

4.  A  Letter  to  the  Vice-Chancellor  In  Connection  with  the  Case  of  the  Rev. 
W.  G.  Ward.  By  A.  C.  Tait,  D.C.L.  (afterwards  Archbishop  of  Canterbury), 
pp.  22.     London  :  VV,  Blackwood.     1845. 

5.  A  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  London  On  a  Subject  Connected  with  the  Recent 
Proceedings  at  Oxford.  By  the  Rev.  Frederick  Oakeley,  M.A.,  pp.  39.  London  : 
Toovey.     1S45. 

6.  The  New  Statute  and  Mr.  Ward.  A  Letter  by  the  Rev.  Frederick  D. 
Maurice,  pp.  31. 

7.  Heads  of  Consideration  On  the  Case  of  Mr.  Ward.  By  the  Rev.  John 
Keble,  M.A.,  pp.  15.     Oxford:  Parker.     1845. 

8.  Tne  Proposed  Degradation  and  Declaration.  By  George  Moberley,  D.C.L. 
(afterwards  Bishop  of  Salisbury),  pp.  29.     Oxford  :  Parker.     1845. 

9.  Suggestions  On  the  New  Statute.  By  W.  Gresley,  M.A.,  Prebendary  of 
Lichfield,  pp.  13.     London  :  James  Burns.      1845. 

10.  A  Letter  to  the  Hebdomadal  Board  On  Mr.  Ward's  Case.  By  the  Rev. 
W  B.  Baxter,  2nd  edition,  pp.  14.     London  :  James  Burns.     1845. 

11.  MDCCCXLV.  The  Month  of fanuary.  Oxford.  By  W.  Winstanley 
Hull,  M.A.,  pp.  18.     London:  Seeley. 

12.  An  Earnest  Appeal  to  the  Members  of  the  Oxford  Convocation.  By  Henry 
ArthurWoodgate,  B.D.,  pp.  9.     London:  Burns.     1845. 

12,-  A  Defence  of  Voting  against  the  Propositions  to  be  Subt>iitted  to  Convocation 
on  February  13,  1845.    By  W.  F.  Donkin,  M.A.,  pp.  7.    Oxford  :  Parker.    1845. 

14.  The  Claim  to  "Hold,  as  Distinct  from  Teaching,"  Explained,  By 
Frederick  Oakeley,  M.A.,  pp.  24.     London:  Toovey.     1845. 

15.  Subscription  to  the  Articles.  By  George  Dudley  Ryder,  M.A.,  pp.  42, 
London  :  Toovey.     1845. 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  412. 


250  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

main  item  in  the  grounds  for  opposing  Dr.  Symons,  that  he 
was  one  of  that  body  who  did  their  best  to  set  the  mark  of 
the  beast  on  the  Church  of  England."  ^  Dr.  Hook,  when 
asked  to  go  to  Oxford  and  vote  against  the  election  of  Dr. 
Symons,  refused  to  do  so,  and  gave  his  reasons  in  a  letter 
to  a  friend  : — 

"  Now,  after  the  publication  of  Mr.  Ward's  book,  which  defends 
Popery  on  ultra-Protestant  principles,  and  is  therefore  subversive 
both  of  principle  and  truth  ;  and  after  various  publications  which 
have  appeared  of  late  with  the  evident  intention  of  introducing 
Mariolatry,  in  other  words  idolatry,  into  our  Church,  and  of  defend- 
ing the  very  worst  abominations  of  Popery,  there  are  very  many 
persons  who,  having  devoted  all  the  energies  of  a  lifetime  to  the 
service  of  their  beloved  and  holy  mother,  the  Church  of  England, 
contending  equally  against  Popery  on  the  one  hand,  and  ultra- 
Protestantism  on  tlie  other,  would  shrink  with  abhorrence  from  any 
appearance  of  sanctioning  these  heresies.  As  we  cannot  take  part 
against  Dr,  Symons  without  seeming  to  side  with  the  Romanisers, 
we  must  stand  aloof  from  the  contest."  2 

The  efforts  of  the  Puseyites  to  defeat  Dr.  Symons  were 
in  vain.  The  election  took  place  on  October  8th,  when 
882  votes  were  given  for  Dr.  Symons,  and  only  183  against 
him.  Small  as  the  minority  was,  it  afforded  to  the  public, 
evidence  of  the  growing  power  of  the  Puseyites. 

In  the  month  of  May,  the  Rev.  Charles  Marriott,  a 
prominent  leader  of  the  Tractarians,  wrote  to  the  Vice- 
Chancellor  of  Oxford,  requiring  him  to  summon  a  Board 
of  Heresy  to  examine  certain  charges  which  he  (Mr.  Mar- 
riott) had  to  bring  against  the  Rev.  James  Garbett,  Professor 
of  Poetry,  founded  on  a  sermon  preached  by  him  before 
the  University.  I  have  not  been  able  to  learn  what  were 
the  portions  of  Mr.  Garbett's  sermon  against  which  Mr. 
Marriott  protested  as  heretical,  though  I  have  no  doubt  it 
was  some  Protestant  statement.  On  May  29th  the  Vice- 
Chancellor  sent  the  following  reply  to  Mr.  Garbett : — 

"  The  Vice-Chancellor  begs  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  a 
copy  of  the  sermon  which,  in  consequence  of  a  formal  allegation  of 
complaint,  he  requested  Mr.  Garbett  to  deliver  to  him,  under  the 

^  English  Churchman,  August  29,  1844,  p,  549, 
"^  Ibid.  October  10,  1S44,  p.  641. 


STONE  ALTARS  AND  CREDENCE  TABLES      25 1 

provision  of  the  Statute,  Tit.  xvi.  sec.  11.  The  Vice-Chancellor 
having  had  before  him,  since  Friday,  the  24th  inst.,  the  sermon 
which  has  thus  been  called  in  question,  and  having  carefully  con- 
sidered what  steps  it  might  be  his  duty  to  take  on  the  occasion, 
informs  Mr.  Garbett,  without  delay,  that  in  the  exercise  of  the 
discretion  reserved  to  him  by  the  Statute,  he  deems  it  unnecessary 
to  institute  any  further  proceedings." 

For  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  the  Romeward  Move- 
ment, the  legality  of  Stone  Altars  and  Credence  Tables  was 
brought  before  the  Ecclesiastical  Courts  this  year.  The 
Cambridge  Camden  Society  had  restored  the  Church  of 
the  Holy  Sepulchre,  Cambridge,  commonly  known  as  the 
Round  Church,  and  towards  the  end  of  the  year  1843 
handed  over  the  Church  thus  restored  to  the  Incumbent 
and  Churchwardens.  On  February  14,  1844,  the  Incum- 
bent, the  Rev.  R.  R.  Faulkener,  issued  a  circular  in  which 
he  asserted  that  during  the  restoration  the  Cambridge 
Camden  Society  had  introduced  into  the  Church  "  a  Stone 
Altar,  without  the  knowledge  or  consent  of  the  Incum- 
bent " ;  and  also  a  Credence  Table.  The  Churchwardens 
replied  to  this  circular,  taking  the  side  of  the  Society 
against  the  Incumbent.  A  vestry  meeting  was  next  held, 
at  which  it  was  decided  to  apply  to  the  Ecclesiastical  Court 
for  a  Faculty  confirming  the  restorations  which  had  been 
made  by  the  Society.  To  this  Mr.  Faulkener  replied  that 
he  yielded  to  none  of  his  parishioners  in  gratitude  to  the 
Society  for  what  it  had  done  in  restoring  his  Church,  the 
Stone  Altar  and  Credence  Table  alone  excepted. 

"Let  these  things,"  said  the  Incumbent,  "  be  taken  away  at  once. 
Harmony,  peace,  love,  and  goodwill  will  quickly  follow.  And  why 
not  ?  What  objection  can  be  raised  to  a  plain  wooden  table,  like 
that  which  our  fathers  and  we  have  been  so  long  accustomed 
to  use?  Christianity  by  its  very  nature  requires,  and  in  express 
words  prescribes  a  Communion  Table.  And  I  ask  no  more.  Surely, 
as  Incumbent  of  the  Church,  I  ought  not  to  have  a  Stone  Altar 
forced  into  it  against  my  conscience.  God  forbid  !  The  Camden 
Society  may  offer  me  one  of  their  Stone  Altars,  but  they  shall  not, 
while  I  have  a  voice  to  speak,  silence  me  in  protesting  loudly 
against  this  abomination." ^ 

^  English  Churchman,  March  7,  1844,  p.  144. 


252  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

In  the  Consistory  Court  of  Ely,  on  July  25,  1844,  the 
Churchwardens  applied  for  a  faculty  confirming  the  erection 
of  the  Stone  Altar  and  Credence  Table.  The  Court  gave 
judgment  in  favour  of  the  application.  Thereupon  there 
was  great  rejoicing  in  the  Fuseyite  camp,  whose  members 
knew  very  well  the  importance  to  them  of  the  decision, 
however  much  they  might,  in  public,  term  the  dispute  an 
unimportant  and  trifling  one.  But  their  rejoicings  were 
shortlived.  The  Incumbent  gave  notice  of  an  appeal  to  the 
Court  of  Arches.  This  was  met  by  the  Puseyites  with  a 
howl  of  indignation  and  gross  personal  insult.  The  organ 
of  the  Puseyite  party  had  the  indecency  to  comment  on  the 
appeal  in  the  following  terms  : — 

"  We  might  apply  to  Mr.  Faulkener  the  old  alliterative  descrip- 
tion of  a  bad  wife  : — 

'  Weak  and  wanton, 
Wicked  and  wilful, 
Wrangling  and  wasteful.' 

But  then  he  is  wasteful  of  other  people's  property ;  he  begs  money 
that  he  may  spend  it  upon  his  own  fancies  and  follies,  knowing,  as 
he  does,  that  every  farthing  which  he  compels  his  opponents  to 
spend  upon  him,  would,  but  for  him,  have  been  spent  to  the  honour 
and  glory  of  Almighty  God.     Thus  he  robs  God  as  well  as  man."  ^ 

But  for  all  this  insult,  abuse,  and  bluster,  the  case  came 
at  length  into  the  Court  of  Arches,  and  on  January  31,  1845, 
judgment  was  given  by  Sir  Herbert  Jenner  Fust,  reversing 
the  decision  of  the  Ely  Consistorial  Court,  and  declaring 
Stone  Altars  and  Credence  Tables  illegal  in  the  Church  of 
England.     In  delivering  judgment  he  said  : — 

"  I  was  asked,  why  should  a  Stone  Font  be  directed  to  be  used, 
and  a  Stone  Communion  Table  be  proscribed .''  To  this  I  answer, 
the  law  has  sanctioned  the  one  and  excluded  the  other,  and  for  this 
very  obvious  reason ;  to  Stone  Altars  or  tables  superstitious  notions 
were  attached,  which  did  not  belong  to  Stone  Fonts."  ^ 

"  After  maturely  weighing  the  subject,  the  conscientious  opinion 
in  my  mind  is,  that  a  structure  like  the  present  [i.e.  the  Stone 
Altar]  is   not  a   Communion  Table  within   the   meaning  of  the 

1  English  Churchman,  November  28,  1844,  p.  758. 
"^  Robertson's  Ecclesiastical  Reports,  vol.  i.  p.  255. 


STONE  ALTARS  AND  CREDENCE  TABLES      253 

Rubric ;  and  that  the  Credence  Table,  being  an  adjunct  not  recog- 
nised by  our  Church,  cannot  be  pronounced  for.  In  coming  to  this 
conclusion,  I  do  not  go  so  far  as  to  admonish  the  Churchwardens  to 
remove  them.  All  I  can  do  is,  to  refuse  to  confirm  the  sentence  of 
the  Court  below.  A  question  here  arises,  whether  I  can  so  alter  the 
Faculty  prayed,  as  to  omit  the  Stone  Altar  and  Credence  Table,  and 
grant  it  in  other  respects,  confirming  all  other  things  not  comprised 
within  the  former  Faculty.  I  see  no  objection  to  that,  and  such  must 
be  the  decree  of  the  Court."  ^ 

Twelve  years  later  the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy 
Council  in  the  case  of  Liddellv.  Westerton,  on  March  21, 
1857,  confirmed  the  decision  of  the  Court  of  Arches  in  the 
above  case  (known  as  Faulkener  v.  Litchfield)  as  to  Stone 
Altars,  declaring  them  illegal  in  the  Church  of  England, 
but  reversing  the  judgment  as  to  Credence  Tables.  On 
this  latter  point  the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council 
said  : — 

"The  next  question  is,  as  to  the  Credence  Tables.  Here  the 
Rubrics  of  the  Prayer  Book  become  important.  Their  Lordships 
entirely  agree  with  the  opinions  expressed  by  the  learned  Judges  in 
these  cases,  and  in  Faulkener  v.  Litchfield,  that  in  the  performance 
of  the  services.  Rites,  and  Ceremonies  ordered  by  the  Prayer  Book, 
the  directions  contained  in  it  must  be  strictly  observed ;  that  no 
omission  and  no  addition  can  be  permitted ;  but  they  are  not  pre- 
pared to  hold  that  the  use  of  all  articles  not  expressly  mentioned  in 
the  Rubric,  although  quite  consistent  with,  and  even  subsidiary  to 
the  service,  is  forbidden.  Organs  are  not  mentioned,  yet  because 
they  are  auxiliary  to  the  singing,  they  are  allowed.  Pews,  cushions 
to  kneel  upon,  pulpit  cloths,  hassocks,  seats  by  the  Communion 
Table,  are  in  constant  use,  yet  they  are  not  mentioned  in  the 
Rubric. 

"Now  what  is  a  Credence  Table?  It  is  simply  a  small  side- 
table,  on  which  the  bread  and  wine  are  placed  before  the  consecra- 
tion, having  no  connection  with  any  superstitious  usage  of  the 
Church  of  Rome.  Their  removal  has  been  ordered  on  the  ground 
that  they  are  adjuncts  to  an  Altar ;  their  Lordships  cannot  but  think 
that  they  are  more  properly  to  be  regarded  as  adjuncts  to  a  Com- 
munion Table."  ^ 

The  Cambridge  Camden  Society,  which  had  restored  the 

^  Robertson's  Ecclesiastical  Reports,  vol.  i.  pp.  259,  260. 
-  Brodrick  and   Freemantle's  Judgments  of  the  Judicial    Committee  of  the 
Frivy  Council,  p.  153. 


2  54  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Round  Church  at  Cambridge,  was  founded  in  1839,  for  the 
purpose  of  promoting  the  restoration  of  Churches  on  the 
Unes  of  pre-Reformation  times.  Perhaps  its  real  object 
was  never  more  accurately  described  than  by  the  Rev. 
Francis  Close,  Rector  of  Cheltenham,  and  afterwards  Dean 
of  Carlisle,  in  a  sermon  which  he  preached  on  November 
5;  1844  :— 

"During  the  year  now  drawing  to  a  close,"  he  said,  "my  atten- 
tion has  been  more  particularly  directed  to  the  same  class  of 
[Tractarian]  errors  and  false  doctrine  promulgated  in  a  still  more 
plausible  and  attractive  form,  namely,  under  the  plea  of  reviving 
Church  Architecture.  It  will  be  my  object  then,  on  the  present 
occasion,  to  show  that  as  Romanism  is  taught  Analytically  at  Oxford, 
it  is  taught  Artistically  at  Cambridge — that  it  is  inculcated  theo- 
retically, in  Tracts,  at  one  University,  and  it  is  sculptured,  painted, 
and  graven  at  the  other.  The  Cambridge  Camdenians  build 
Churches  and  furnish  symbolic  vessels,  by  which  the  Oxford  Tract- 
arians  may  carry  out  their  principles."  ^ 

Dr.  Close  proved  his  indictment  of  the  Cambridge  Cam- 
den Society  (which,  however,  must  not  be  identified  with 
the  Camden  Society  recently  united  to  the  Royal  Historical 
Society)  by  abundant  extracts  from  its  publications,  show- 
ing clearly  that  the  design  was  to  restore  Churches  so  as  to 
make  them  suited  for  Popish  services  and  Popish  cere- 
monial. His  sermon  was  subsequently  published  with  the 
title  of  The  Restoration  of  Churches  is  the  Restoration  of 
Popery,  His  opponents  ridiculed  the  title,  and  represented 
the  preacher  as  opposed  to  all  Church  Restoration.  When 
reprinting  his  sermon,  in  1863,  Dr.  Close  repudiated  such 
an  idea.  "  No  person,"  he  said,  "  could  honestly  raise 
such  a  charge  against  him — he  will  not  say  who  had  read 
the  pamphlet — but  who  had  even  read  the  rest  of  the  title- 
page,  which  marks  as  clearly  as  can  be  that  his  assertion 
was  limited  to  a  special  sort  of  *  Church  Restoration.'  "  ^ 
And  even  in  the  sermon  itself  the  preacher  had  explained 
himself  clearly  enough.  "  I  affirm,"  he  said,  "  that  I  am 
not  opposed  to  the  decoration  of  Churches,  but  to  extrava- 
gant and  gorgeous  decoration  ;  that  I  am  not  an  enemy  to 

^  The  Footsteps  of  Error.     By  Francis  Close,  D.D.,  Dean  of  Carlisle,  p.  75. 
London  :  Hatchard  &  Co.     1863. 
"^  Ibid.  p.  73. 


ROMANISING    RESTORATION    OF    CHURCHES  255 

anything  that  is  beautiful  in  architecture,  while  I  am,  and 
hope  ever  to  be,  tJie  implacable  enemy  of  all  Popish  and  medi- 
ceval  restorations.  The  best  evidence  I  can  allege  in  support 
of  such  assertions  are  the  public  buildings  in  my  own 
[Cheltenham]  parish,  whose  erection  I  have  been  permitted 
either  to  originate  or  extensively  to  promote  ;  they  are 
silent  but  not  inefficacious  witnesses  that  neither  with 
respect  to  Churches  or  to  Colleges  do  I  desire  to  see  them 
as  *  brick  barns.' "  ^ 

This  faithful  warning  of  Dr.  Close,  in  1844,  against  the 
Restoration  of  Churches  on  Romish  lines,  is  more  needed 
now  than  when  first  uttered,  and,  perhaps,  by  no  class  of 
men  more  than  by  Evangelical  Incumbents  and  Church- 
wardens. Ritualistic  Incumbents  know  what  such  Restora- 
tions mean,  while  Protestant  Churchmen  are,  to  an  alarming 
extent,  blind  to  the  evil.  All  over  the  land  we  find  new 
Churches  built,  and  old  ones  restored,  in  a  style  which  can 
only  delight  the  hearts  of  the  Romanisers,  although  those 
Churches  are  frequently  in  Evangelical  and  Protestant 
hands.  Why  should  Protestant  clergymen  permit  their 
Churches  to  be  so  arranged  as  to  make  them  ready  for  a 
Roman  Catholic  priest  to  say  Mass  in  ?  It  would  be  the 
wisdom  of  Protestants  never  to  build  a  new  Church  with 
a  Chancel.^  And  what  do  they  want  with  Communion 
Tables  erected  on  high,  like  Roman  Catholic  Altars  ?  And 
why  do  they  permit  Chancel  gates  and  screens  to  be 
erected,  to  separate  the  supposed  Holy  of  Holies  within 
from  where  the  common  laity  sit  without  ?  Why  allow 
Churches  to  be  so  arranged  as  to  convey  to  the  people  the 
idea  that  the  Chancel  is  holier  than  any  other  place  ?  For 
my  part,  I  believe  that  there  is  no  portion  of  a  Parish 
Church  which  is  holier  than  another  part.  I  am  certain 
that  where  the  poor  man  kneels,  in  his  humility,  at  the 
west  end  of  the  Church  (if  he  be  a  true  Christian)  is  in 
God's  sight  quite  as  holy  as  where  the  clergy  stand  in  their 
glory  in  the  Chancel.  We  sadly  need  a  wholesale  Reform 
in  Church  Building  and  Church  Restoration. 

^  Close's  Footsteps  of  Error,  p.  83. 

"  The  majority  of  Wren's  Churches  in  the  City  of  London  were  built  without 
chancels. 


CHAPTER  X 

Pusey  thinks  that  God  is  "  drawing  "  Newman  to  Rome — Pusey  refuses 
to  write  against  the  Church  of  Rome — Newman  secedes  to  Rome — 
Father  Dominic's  narrative  of  Newman's  reception — Pusey  on  the 
secession — Newman  goes  to  see  the  Pope — When  and  where  was 
Newman  ordained  a  Roman  Catholic?  Some  noteworthy  circum- 
stances— St.  Saviour's,  Leeds — Founded  by  Dr.  Pusey — He  insists 
on  an  Ahar — The  distinction  between  an  Altar  and  a  Table — Dr. 
Hook's  anxiety — Dr.  Wilberforce  appointed  Bishop  of  Oxford — 
Pusey  tries  to  secure  his  goodwill  for  Puseyism — He  fails — Pusey's 
desire  for  Union  with  Rome — His  subtle  tactics  with  his  penitents — 
Hook  believes  Pusey  is  under  the  influence  of  the  Jesuits— The  Exeter 
Surplice  Riots — Debate  in  the  House  of  Lords— More  Puseyite 
exhortations  to  prosecute  Evangelical  clergy — An  extraordinary  case 
in  Salisbury  Diocese — Extempore  prayers  in  a  Schoolroom  "a  gross 
scandal" — The  case  of  the  Rev.  James  Shore — Pusey's  Sermon  on 
The  Entire  Absolution  of  the  Penitent — Extracts  from  the  Sermon — 
Pusey  goes  to  Confession  for  the  first  time — The  effect  of  Pusey's 
Confessional  work  on  his  penitents — Testimony  of  Dean  Boyle — 
Clerical  Retreats. 

The  year  1845  will  ever  be  memorable  in  the  annals  of  the 
Romeward  Movement,  as  the  year  in  which  the  Rev.  J.  H. 
Newman  seceded  to  Rome.  The  event  had  long  been 
expected,  yet  when  it  came  it  caused  almost  as  great  a 
sensation  as  if  it  had  been  quite  unexpected.  In  the  month 
of  July  Pusey  seems  to  have  made  up  his  mind  that  Newman 
would  go  over  to  Rome,  but  he  actually  said  that  he  thought 
that  perhaps  God  was  "  drawing  him  "  thither  !  "  I  have," 
he  wrote  to  Keble,  on  July  8th,  "looked  upon  this  [expected 
secession]  of  dear  Newman  as  a  mysterious  dispensation, 
as  though  (if  it  be  indeed  so)  Almighty  God  was  drawing 
him,  as  a  chosen  instrument,  for  some  office  in  the  Roman 
Church  (although  he  himself  goes,  of  course,  not  as  a  Re- 
former, but  as  a  simple  act  of  faith),  and  so  I  thought  that 
He  might  be  pleased  to  give  him  convictions  (if  it  be  so) 

which  He  does  not  give  to  others.     At  least  I  have  come 

256 


The  story  of  newman's  reception  257 

into  this  way  of  thinking."  ^  In  the  prospect  of  Newman's 
Secession  Pusey's  friends  urged  him  to  take  up  his  pen  and 
write  against  the  Church  of  Rome ;  but  he  refused  to 
do  so.  "I  cannot  any  more,"  he  said,  "take  the  negative 
ground  against  Rome  ;  I  can  only  remain  neutral.  I  have 
indeed  for  some  time  left  off  alleging  grounds  against 
Rome."  -  In  the  same  month  of  July  Pusey  wrote  to 
Newman  himself  with  reference  to  his  expected  secession : 
— "  I  suppose,  of  course,  that,  if  it  is  so,  Almighty  God  is 
pleased  to  dratv you  for  some  office  which  He  has  for  you."  ^ 
On  October  9,  1845,  Newman  was  received  into  the 
Church  of  Rome,  in  his  Littlemore  Monastery,  by  Father 
Dominic,  a  Passionist.  Three  weeks  later  this  gentleman 
sent  to  the  Tablet  an  account  of  Newman's  reception.  He 
had,  he  said,  previously,  on  Michaelmas  Day,  received  the 
Rev.  J.  D.  Dalgairns  into  the  Church  of  Rome,  at  Aston 
Hall:  — 

"  I  was,"  wrote  Father  Dominic,  "on  the  point  of  setting  out  for 
Belgium,  when  I  received  a  note  from  him  [Dalgairns],  inviting  me 
to  pass  through  Oxford  on  my  way ;  for,  he  said,  I  might  perhaps 
find  something  to  do  there.  I  accordingly  set  out  from  here  on  the 
8th  of  October,  and  reached  Oxford  about  ten  o'clock  the  evening 
of  the  same  day.  I  there  found  Mr.  Dalgairns  and  Mr.  St.  John, 
who  had  made  his  profession  of  Faith  at  Prior  Park  on  the  2nd  of 
October,  awaiting  my  arrival.  They  told  me  that  I  was  to  receive 
Mr.  Newman  into  the  Church.  This  news  filled  me  with  joy,  and 
made  me  soon  forget  the  rain  that  had  been  pelting  upon  me  for  the 
last  five  hours. 

"  From  Oxford  we  drove  in  a  chaise  to  Littlemore,  where  we 
arrived  about  eleven  o'clock.  I  immediately  sat  down  near  a  fire  to 
dry  my  clothes,  when  Mr.- Newman  entered  the  room,  and,  throwing 
himself  at  my  feet,  asked  my  blessing,  and  begged  me  to  hear  his 
confession,  and  receive  him  into  the  Church.  He  made  his  confes- 
sion that  same  night,  and  on  the  following  morning  the  Reverend 
Messrs.  Bowles  and  Staunton  did  the  same :  in  the  evening  of  the 
same  day  these  three  made  their  profession  of  Faith  in  the  usual 
form  in  their  private  Oratory,  one  after  another,  with  such  fervour 
and  piety  that  I  was  almost  out  of  myself  for  joy.  I  afterwards  gave 
them  all  canonical  absolution,  and  administered  to  them  the  Sacra- 

_  ^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  453. 

R 


258  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

ment  of  Baptism  sub  conditione.  On  the  following  morning  I  said 
Mass  in  their  Oratory,  and  gave  Communion  to  Messrs.  Newman, 
St.  John,  Bowles,  Staunton,  and  Dalgairns."  ^ 

A  correspondent  of  the  English  Churchman  declared, 
commenting  on  Newman's  secession  : — "  It  has  happened 
that  in  heart  and  intention,  Mr.  Newman,  while  nominally 
with  us,  has  during  the  last  four  years  been  a  member  of 
the  Roman  Communion."  ^  Pusey  wrote  a  letter,  which 
appeared  in  the  same  issue  of  the  English  Churchman,  on 
Newman's  secession,  in  which  he  stated  that,  having  heard 
that  the  Romanists  on  the  Continent  had  long  been  praying 
to  God  for  Newman's  conversion  to  Rome,  he  had  then 
begun  to  fear  that  "  God  will  give  them  whom  they  pray 
for  ;  "  and  that,  as  to  Newman  himself : — "  He  seems  then, 
to  me,  not  so  much  gone  from  us,  as  transplanted  into 
another  part  of  the  Vineyard,  where  the  full  energies  of 
his  powerful  mind  can  be  employed,  which  here  they 
were  not." 

Puseyites  and  Ritualists  have  never  ceased  to  mourn  for 
the  loss  of  Newman,  as  though  it  were  some  great  evil  in- 
flicted on  the  Enghsh  Church.  It  was,  in  reality,  nothing 
of  the  kind,  but  a  great  blessing.  A  year  before  it  took 
place.  Archdeacon  Samuel  Wilberforce  declared  : — "  If 
Newman  is  to  go,  the  sooner  he  goes  the  better,  because  in 
going  he  will  lose  his  power  of  leading  others  over  with 
him."  3  The  sooner  an  enemy  is  removed  from  the  camp, 
the  better  it  will  be  for  the  camp  itself,  though  the  enemy 
personally  may  be  the  loser  by  the  change.  There  are  men 
in  the  present  day  who  think  that  if  all  the  Ritualistic  clerical 
rebels  against  the  law  of  the  Church  were  ejected,  the 
Church  of  England  would  suffer  loss.  Never  was  there  a 
greater  delusion.  As  well  might  we  argue  that  a  house 
would  become  more  healthy  by  retaining  in  it  all  who  are 
suffering  from  fever,  and  that  the  epidemic  would  increase 
in  the  house  if  those  who  are  stricken  with  it  should  leave  it. 

Newman's  perversion  led  to  a  very  large  secession  to 
Rome  of  his  followers.     He  continued  to  live  at  Littlemore 

^  English  Churchman,  November  27,  1845,  p.  761. 

'^  Ibid.  October  16,  1845,  P-  662. 

'  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  i.  p.  258, 


WHEN    WAS    NEWMAN    ORDAINED    A    PRIEST?        259 

for  several  months  after  his  reception.  On  November  ist 
he  was  confirmed  by  Bishop  Wiseman.  On  February  23, 
1846,  he  removed  to  Oscott  College.  While  he  was  there, 
Wiseman  wrote  to  Dr.  Russell  of  Maynooth  : — "  While  I  am 
writing  this,  Mr.  Newman  is  under  examination  for  Minor 
Orders."^  The  Univers,  oi  September  20,  1846,  published 
a  letter  from  Langres,  stating  that  Newman  was  in  that  city 
on  his  way  to  Rome.  "  Mr.  Newman,"  says  the  writer, 
"was  accompanied  by  the  Rev.  Ambrose  St.  John,  who  also 
has  been  admitted  to  Minor  Orders,  and  repairs  to  Rome  to 
receive  the  priesthood."  ^  On  October  28th  Newman  arrived 
in  the  City  of  Rome.  The  Rome  correspondent  of  the  Daily 
NezvSj  "  Father  Prout,"  in  announcing  his  arrival,  added  : — 
"  In  a  few  days  Mr.  Newman,  late  of  Oxford,  and  his  com- 
panions, will  take  possession  of  chambers  in  the  College  of 
Propaganda,  and  enter  on  a  preparatory  course  previous  to 
re-ordination  in  the  Church  of  Rome." 

The  question  here  arises,  on  what  date,  and  in  what  build- 
ing, was  Newman  ordained  a  priest  of  the  Church  of  Rome  ? 
The  answer  to  this  question  must  be — at  least  until  more 
light  is  thrown  on  that  mysterious  event — no  one  knows, 
except  the  authorities  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  they  have 
never  given  the  public  any  informatioti  on  the  subject !  We 
have  seen,  on  Roman  Catholic  authority,  that  he  went  to 
Rome  expressly  for  the  purpose  of  being  there  ordained  a 
priest.  There  was  no  necessity  for  him  to  go  there  ;  he 
could  have  been  ordained  a  priest  in  England  by  Bishop 
Wiseman,  and  have  thus  saved  himself  the  trouble  of  the 
journey.  When  he  died,  as  Cardinal  Newman,  in  1890, 
numerous  biographies  were  published  by  the  Roman  Catho- 
lic papers,  but  I  have  not  seen  in  either  of  them  any  informa- 
tion on  the  point  in  question.  Why  this  strange  and 
mysterious  silence  ?  The  event  was  an  important  one,  such 
as  one  would  naturally  expect  to  find  recorded  in  any 
account  of  Newman's  life.  But  not  a  line  on  the  subject 
has,  so  far  as  I  am  aware,  been  yet  written  by  any  Roman 
Catholic  to  throw  any  light  on  this  subject.     In  1897,  The 

^  Life  and  Times  of  Cardinal  Wiseman,  vol.  i.  p.  450. 

*  Cardinal  Newman  :  A  Monograph,     By  John  Oldcastle,  p.  34.      London  : 
Burns  &  Oates. 


2  6o  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Life  and  Times  of  Cardinal  Wiseman  was  published  in  two 
volumes,  written  by  Mr.  Wilfrid  Ward.  The  first  of  these 
volumes  contains  several  lengthy  letters,  written  from  Rome 
by  Newman  and  his  friend  Mr.  Ambrose  St.  John,  during 
their  residence  there  (which  lasted  until  towards  the  end  of 
the  year  1847),  and  addressed  to  Bishop  Wiseman.  In  these 
letters  they  give  very  full  and  detailed  accounts  of  their 
daily  life,  of  their  interviews  with  the  Pope  and  other  pro- 
minent personages,  with  ample  particulars  of  all  their  plans 
for  future  work  when  they  returned  to  England  ;  but  not 
one  word  about  an  event  which  would  have  been  the  most  impor- 
tant in  Newman  s  life — his  ordination  as  a  priest  in  the  Church 
of  Rojne  !  Soon  after  Newman's  death,  a  brief  biography 
was  published  by  a  Roman  Catholic,  "John  Oldcastle," 
under  the  title  of  Cardinal  Newman:  A  Monograph.  In  it 
we  read  : — "  Newman  received  Holy  Orders  at  the  hands  of 
Cardinal  Franzoni,  and,  in  1847,  he  announced,  in  a  letter 
from  Rome  to  Mr.  Hope-Scott,  the  important  plans  already 
made."  ^  Then  follows  an  extract  from  the  letter  alluded  to. 
It  was  evidently  the  intention  of  "John  Oldcastle"  to  con- 
vey the  impression  to  his  readers  that  this  letter  to  Mr. 
Hope-Scott  was  written  after  Newman's  ordination  as  a 
priest  by  Cardinal  Franzoni.  On  turning  to  the  Memoirs 
of  fames  Hope- Scott,  where  the  letter  is  printed  in  full,  we 
find  that  it  was  dated  "  Feb.  23,  '47  ; "  ^  but  in  the  English 
Churchman  for  April  i,  1847,  page  234,  I  find  an  extract 
published  from  the  Roman  Catholic  Tablet,  of  apparently  the 
previous  week,  and  therefore  a  full  month  after  Newman's 
letter  to  Mr.  Hope-Scott.  And  this  is  what  the  Tablet 
said : — 

"  We  hear  with  great  pleasure  that  Mr.  Newman  is  to  return  to 
England  as  a  Brother  of  the  Oratory.  .  .  .  The  story  that  there  has 
been  any  difficulty  about  Mr.  Newman^s  ordination  is  of  course  a 
mere  fable.  His  ordination,  and  that  of  his  companions,  may  pro- 
bably be  delayed  a  little  by  the  noviciate  requisite  for  members  of 
the  Oratory,  but  it  will  follow,  under  the  direction  of  the  proper 
authorities,  as  a  matter  of  course." 

It  is  therefore  certain  that  up  to  about  the  middle  of 

^  Cardinal  Newman :  A  Monograph.     By  John  Oldcastle,  p.  35. 
*  Memoirs  of  James  Ilope-Scott,  vol.  ii.  p.  73. 


STARTLING    ASSERTIONS    CONCERNING    NEWMAN       26 1 

March  1847 — five  months  after  his  arrival  in  Rome — 
Newman  had  not,  so  far  as  the  public  were  aware,  been 
ordained  a  priest.  In  the  year  1866  Newman's  Apologia 
Pro  Vita  Sua  was  replied  to  by  Mr.  Charles  Hastings  Col- 
lette,  in  a  volume  of  200  pages,  entitled  Dr.  Newman  and 
His  Religions  Opinions.  In  it  the  author  made  some  start- 
ling statements  about  Newman's  ordination,  which,  so  far 
as  I  can  ascertain,  have  never  been  answered.  Certainly 
they  were  not  replied  to  by  Newman  himself,  though  it 
would  undoubtedly  have  been  worth  his  while  to  have 
done  so.  It  is  simply  in  the  hope  of  forcing,  if  that  be 
possible,  the  hands  of  the  Papal  authorities  into  producing 
the  official  record  of  Newman's  ordination,  together  with 
the  date  and  place  where  it  occurred,  that  I  here  repro- 
duce Mr.  Collette's  statement.  Speaking  of  Newman  and 
Froude's  secret  interview  with  Wiseman  in  Rome,  in  1833, 
to  which  I  have  already  referred,  Mr.  Collette  writes  : — 

"  Now  it  is  a  fact  that  it  was  considered  at  the  time,  and  has 
been  often  publicly  repeated,  that  Dr.  Newman  was  at  this  inter- 
view with  Dr.  Wiseman,  in  company  with  Froude,  formally  ordained 
a  priest  of  the  Roman  Church,  being  then,  in  fact,  a  member  of  that 
communion.  Dr.  Newman  again  visited  Rome  under  the  advice  of 
Dr.  Wiseman  in  1845  5^  ^^^^^  ^^  had  publicly  renounced  the  com- 
munion of  the  Church  of  England.  He  went  ostensibly  to  be 
inducted  into  the  priesthood,  a  ceremony  that  could  have  been 
equally  well  performed  in  England.  It  has  been  confidently  asserted 
that  Dr.  Newman  was  not  then  (1845)2  ordained  a  priest  of  Rome; 
that  his  journey  was  a  make-believe.  Holy  Orders  in  the  Roman 
Church  are  accounted  a  Sacrament,  which  cannot  be  repeated 
without  sacrilege.  Anglican  Orders  are  void,  in  the  estimation  of 
the  Roman  Church.  If  Dr.  Newman  was  secretly  ordained  in  1833, 
the  ceremony  could  not  be  repeated  in  1845,^  and  it  was  publicly 
alleged  at  the  time  that  he  was  not  ordained  in  1845  [1846],  nor 
ever  since.  .  .  .  When  Dr.  Newman  publicly  declared  himself  a 
Romanist,  and  went  to  Rome  ostensibly  for  his  ordination,  a  day 
was  proposed  for  the  performance  of  that  ceremony.  Great  curiosity 
was  excited  at  the  time  among  the  English  at  Rome,  to  witness 
the  ceremony.  Those  who  were  there  at  the  time  well  remember 
the  circumstance.  But  for  one  reason  or  another  it  was  deferred, 
until  general  interest  died  away,  and  no  ordination,  so  far  as  the 

1  A  misprint  for  1846.  ^  1846.  *  1846. 


262  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

public  are  aware,  took  place.  One  only  conclusion  was  come  to ; 
namely,  that  Dr.  Newman  had  been  already  ordained  a  priest  of 
Rome,  and  was  actually  a  priest  while  ofificiating  in  the  Anglican 
Church,  This  challenge  was,  at  the  time,  publicly  made,  and  has 
never  been  denied.  .  .  . 

"  Dr.  Newman  is  now  openly  an  ofiEiciating  priest  in  the  Roman 
Church.  It  was  therefore  with  more  than  ordinary  curiosity  that 
we  anxiously  awaited  the  announcement  by  Dr.  Newman,  in  his 
biography  [the  Apologia  Pro  Vita  Sua\  as  to  the  exact  time  when, 
in  fact,  he  had  formally  taken  the  vows  of  the  Roman  Church  as  a 
priest.  One  would  have  supposed  that  the  precise  date  when  this 
important  occurrence  took  place,  and  the  circumstances  attending 
it,  and  by  whom  the  ceremony  was  performed,  would  be  duly 
notified.  But  we  look  in  vain  for  this  information ;  all  we  are 
told  is,  that  in  1845  ^^  ^'^^  'received'  into  the  Church  of  Rome; 
and  he  says  'for  a  while  after  my  reception  I  proposed  to  betake 
myself  to  some  secular  calling ' ;  but  he  nowhere  mentions  his  re- 
ordination."  ^ 

Now  I  know  very  well  that  it  is  quite  easy  to  pooh- 
pooh  Mr.  Collette's  assertions,  and  to  say  that  they  are  not 
worth  a  moment's  thought.  But  this  is  not  to  answer  the 
question,  When  and  where  was  Dr.  Newman  ordained  a 
priest  of  the  Church  of  Rome  ? 

The  consecration  of  the  new  Church  of  St.  Saviour's, 
Leeds,  on  October  28,  1845,  was  an  event  of  more  than 
ordinary  interest  to  the  Puseyites.  The  Church  was  built 
for  the  purpose  of  carrying  the  principles  of  the  Oxford 
Movement  into  practical  operation  in  a  poor  parish.  Its 
real  founder  was  Dr.  Pusey  himself,  and  up  to  a  certain 
point  he  had  worked  most  cordially  with  Dr.  Hook,  Vicar 
of  Leeds,  in  making  all  necessary  arrangements  for  the 
new  Church.  As  far  back  as  1839  Pusey  had  corresponded 
with  Hook  about  it,  mentioning  that  a  friend  (who  we  now 
know  was  Pusey  himself)  was  willing  to  give  ;^i5oo  to  build 
at  Leeds  an  "  Oratorium,"  but  that  he  must  make  it  a  con- 
dition that  when  erected  it  should  have  an  inscription  with 
the  words:  "Ye  who  enter  this  holy  place,  pray  for  the 
sinner  who  built  it."  The  Bishop  of  Ripon  was  con- 
sulted about  the  proposed  inscription,  and  he  said  that  on 

^  Dr.  Newman  and  His  Religious  Opinions.  By  Charles  Hastings  Collette, 
pp.  47-49.     London  :  J.  F.  Shaw  &  Co.     1866. 


ST.    saviour's,    LEEDS  263 

receiving  an  assurance  that  the  person  referred  to  was  then 
alive,  he  would  not  object  to  it.  Of  course,  I  need  hardly 
point  out  that  as  soon  as  the  donor  was  dead  the  inscrip- 
tion would  then  become  an  invitation  to  pray  for  the  dead. 
No  doubt  this  is  what  Pusey  had  in  his  mind  when  he  first 
proposed  its  erection.  Eventually  the  foundation-stone 
was  laid  on  September  14,  1842  ;  but  no  great  publicity 
was  given  to  the  event,  through  fear  of  arousing  the  oppo- 
sition of  the  Protestant  Churchmen  of  Leeds.  As  the 
building  of  the  Church  progressed,  it  gave  rise  to  a  consider- 
able amount  of  local  discussion,  so  that  in  November,  1843, 
Hook  told  Pusey:  *' I  really  dread  the  consecration."^ 
Some  members  of  the  Cambridge  Camden  Society  wished 
that  the  Ten  Commandments,  Creed,  and  Lord's  Prayer 
should  not  be  set  up  near  the  Communion  Table ;  but 
Pusey,  to  his  credit  be  it  said,  refused.  He  thought  there 
was  "  much  good  "  in  having  them  in  such  a  position.  "  I 
cannot  but  think,"  he  said,  "that  the  Ten  Commandments, 
with  their  strict  warning  voice,  are  far  more  valuable  to  us, 
as  attendants  on  the  altar,  than  images  or  pictures  or 
tapestry  would  be  ; "  ^  but  he  was  unwilling,  he  added,  to 
give  up  the  proposed  Altar  Cross.  As  to  the  material  of 
which  the  "  altar  "  was  to  be  made,  Pusey  was  very  emphatic. 
He  would  rather  have  the  consecration  of  the  Church 
suspended  than  erect  in  it  a  Communion  Table.  He 
would  have  an  "  altar."  "  I  could  not  myself,"  he  wrote 
to  a  correspondent,  "put  up  what  should  seem  to  be  a 
mere  table.  When  truth  was  not  denied,  tables  were 
altars,  as  well  as  altars  holy  tables ;  now  they  seem  to  me 
to  involve  at  least  a  withdrawal  of  the  truth  ;  and  if  insisted 
upon,  a  denial  of  it.  I  dare  not  myself  be  any  party  to  put- 
ting up  a  table.  I  would  sooner  have  the  consecration  of 
a  Church  suspended.  I  would  spare  any  needless  offence ; 
but,  if  this  be  one,  it  seems  to  me  unavoidable.  But  I  hope 
with  a  few  years  it  will  much  diminish,  and  every  altar  is 
a  gain."  ^  No  doubt  every  "  altar "  erected  in  a  parish 
Church  is  a  gain  to  the  Romeward  Movement ;  but  at  the 
same  time  it  is  a  loss  to  Scriptural  truth.     The  New  Testa- 

1  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  ii.  p.  475. 

2  Ibid.  p.  477.  3  ijjid,  p.  478. 


264  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

ment  knows  nothing  of  an  "altar"  on  which  to  celebrate 
the  Lord's  Supper  ;  and  the  Church  of  England  orders 
only  a  table ;  but  that  which  she  has  ordered  was  not 
sufficient  for  Dr.  Pusey.  On  this  point  the  judgment  of  the 
judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council  in  the  case  of  Liddell 
V.  Westerton  may  be  usefully  cited.    Their  lordships  said  : — 

"The  distinction  between  an  'Altar'  and  a  'Communion  Table' 
is  in  itself  essential  and  deeply  founded  in  the  most  important 
difference  in  matters  of  faith  between  Protestants  and  Romanists, 
namely,  in  the  different  notions  of  the  nature  of  the  Lord's  Supper 
which  prevailed  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  at  the  time  of  the 
Reformation,  and  those  which  were  introduced  by  the  Reformers. 
By  the  former  it  was  considered  as  a  Sacrifice  of  the  Body  and 
Blood  of  the  Saviour.  The  Altar  was  the  place  on  which  the 
Sacrifice  was  to  be  made ;  the  elements  were  to  be  consecrated, 
and,  being  so  consecrated,  were  treated  as  the  actual  Body  and 
Blood  of  the  Victim.  The  Reformers,  on  the  other  hand,  con- 
sidered the  Holy  Communion  not  as  a  Sacrifice,  but  as  a  Feast, 
to  be  celebrated  at  the  Lord's  Table."  ^ 

Pusey  wished  the  new  Church  to  be  known  as  "  Holy 
Cross  Church,"  but  the  Bishop  of  Ripon  objected  to  this, 
and  therefore  "  St.  Saviour's  Church  "  was  selected  instead. 
The  Bishop  refused  to  consecrate  the  Church  unless  a 
wooden  Communion  Table  were  erected,  and  not  either  a 
stone  altar  or  a  stone  slab  resting  on  a  wooden  frame. 
The  Rev.  Richard  Ward  was  appointed  the  first  Incum- 
bent. He  afterwards  seceded  to  Rome.  When  the  selec- 
tion of  special  preachers  at  the  Consecration  services  had 
to  be  made,  Hook  became  very  anxious.  Newman  had 
only  just  seceded  to  Rome,  and  the  Vicar  of  Leeds  was 
naturally  fearful  lest  special  preachers  should  be  selected, 
who  might  soon  after  go  over  to  Rome.  "  If,"  Hook  wrote 
to  Pusey,  "  any  of  the  preachers  fall  away  into  the  fearful 
schism  of  Rome,  against  which  I  am  accustomed  to  preach 
so  very  strongly  (I  am  this  very  day  about  to  denounce  the 
heresy  of  Rome  in  praying  to  Saints),  more  mischief  will  be 
done  than  I  can  calculate."  ^     At  last  the  consecration  took 

^  Brodrick  and  Freemantle's  Judgments  of  the  Judicial  Conitnittee  of  Privy 
Comic d,  p.  144. 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Fuse)'.,  vol.  ii.  p,  487. 


BISHOP    WILBERFORCE    AND    PUSEY  265 

place,  and  soon  St.  Saviour's,  Leeds,  became  notorious 
throughout  the  country  as  a  hotbed  of  Popery,  and  a 
nursery  of  clerical  and  lay  perverts  to  Rome. 

Another  event  of  considerable  importance  occurred  this 
year,  in  the  appointment  of  Dean  Samuel  Wilberforce  as 
Bishop  of  Oxford,  in  the  room  of  Dr.  Bagot,  who  had  been 
transferred  to  Bath  and  Wells.  Churchmen  everywhere 
wondered  what  would  come  from  such  an  appointment. 
Evangehcal  Churchmen  had  reason  to  expect  fair  play  at 
his  hands,  though  he  had  refused  to  be  recognised  as  a 
member  of  their  party.  The  Puseyites  hoped  for  the  best, 
yet  with  fear  and  trembling.  As  soon  as  Dr.  Wilberforce's 
nomination  was  made  public,  Dr.  Pusey  wrote  to  him, 
evidently  anxious  to  secure  his  goodwill  for  himself  and  his 
friends.  Wilberforce  was  elected  as  Bishop  by  the  Dean 
and  Chapter  of  Christ  Church,  on  November  15th,  and  on 
the  same  day  Pusey  opened  a  correspondence  with  the 
Bishop-Elect,  in  which  he  explained  his  own  position  and 
work  to  his  future  Diocesan.  "  For  myself,"  Pusey  said, 
"  I  can  too  readily  think  that  any  apparent  connection 
with  myself  would  rather  embarrass  you  with  many ;  else  it 
would  have  given  me  much  pleasure  if,  in  the  retired  way 
in  which  I  live,  my  house  could  be  of  any  service  to  you 
at  any  time  that  your  duties  shall  call  you  into  Oxford."^ 
But  Wilberforce  was  not  to  be  caught  in  this  way.  He 
replied,  thanking  Pusey  for  the  kind  tone  of  his  letter 
towards  himself  ;  but  ending  with  what  must  have  been  a 
bitter  pill  for  Pusey  to  swallow.  "  I  could  not  then,"  wrote 
Wilberforce,  "  but  say,  how  very  deeply  (to  go  no  further 
back)  the  letters  to  which  you  allude  had  pained  me ;  and 
that  I  cannot  feel  that  the  language  therein  held  as  to  the 
errors  of  the  Church  of  Rome  is,  to  my  apprehension,  to 
be  reconciled  with  the  doctrinal  formularies  of  our  own 
Reformed  Church."  2  «  it  was,"  says  Canon  Liddon,  "a 
disagreeable  surprise  to  one  in  Pusey's  anxious  position, 
entertaining,  as  he  had  done,  such  hopeful  expectations,  to 
receive  thus  early  a  plain  intimation  that  the  attitude  of  his 
future  Bishop  was  so  different  from  all  that  he  had  antici- 
pated, as  well  as  from  that  of  the  previous  occupant  of  the 

^  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  i.  p.  302.  Ibid.  p.  302. 


2  66  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT- 

See."  ^  I  have  already  quoted  a  portion  of  this  correspond- 
ence. Pusey's  answer  to  this  letter  of  the  Bishop-Elect 
shows  clearly  how  very  far  he  had  gone  in  helping  on  the 
Romeward  Movement  : — 

"I  did  not,"  he  said,  "mean  to  say  anything  definitely  as  to 
myself,  but  only  to  maintain,  in  the  abstract,  the  tenability  of  a  certain 
position,  in  ivhich  very  many  are,  of  not  holding  themselves  obliged  to 
renounce  any  doctrine,  formally  decreed  by  the  Roman  Church.  And 
this  I  knew  would  satisfy  many  minds,  who  do  not  wish  to  form 
any  definite  opinion  on  those  doctrines,  yet  still  wish  not  to  be 
obliged  to  commit  themselves  against  them.  But  in  this  I  was  not 
speaking  of  what  is  commonly  meant  by  'Popery,'  which  is  a  large 
practical  system,  going  beyond  their  formularies,  varying  perhaps 
indefinitely  in  different  minds.  I  meant  simply  '  the  letter  of  what 
has  been  decreed  by  the  Roman  Church ' ;  and  this  I  have,  for 
years,  hoped  might  ultimately  become  the  basis  of  tmion  between  us."^ 

Here  Pusey's  anxious  desire  for  the  Union  of  the 
Church  of  England  with  the  corrupt  Church  of  Rome 
comes  out  most  clearly,  as  does  also  his  remarkable  ac- 
knowledgment that  he  had  "  for  years  "  previously  hoped 
for  such  an  unholy  union.  "  I  cannot  but  think,"  he  said, 
in  this  same  letter,  "  that  Rome  and  we  are  not  irre- 
concilably at  variance,  but  that,  in  the  great  impending 
contest  with  unbelief,  we  shall  be  on  the  same  side,  and  in 
God's  time,  and  in  His  way,  one."  I  am  not  exaggerating 
when  I  assert  that  from  this  period  Reunion  with  Rome 
became  the  absorbing  passion  of  Pusey's  life.  Certainly 
the  "very  many,"  who,  in  1845,  considered  that,  although 
in  the  Church  of  England,  they  were  not  "  obliged  to  re- 
nounce any  doctrine  formally  decreed  by  the  Roman 
Church,"  would  not  have  felt  much  pressure  on  their 
conscience  in  accepting  Union  with  Rome  on  Rome's 
terms.  And  even  as  to  Pusey  himself  there  were  but 
few,  if  any,  of  the  "formal"  doctrines  of  Rome  which 
he  would,  previous  to  the  Vatican  Council,  insist  on  that 
Church  renouncing  as  a  condition  of  Reunion  with  the 
Church  of  England.  He  wrote,  it  is  true,  strongly  against 
Mariolatry  in  the  Church  of  Rome,  as  a  part  of  her 
"  large  practical  system,  going  beyond  their  formularies  " 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  iii.  p.  42. 

*  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  i.  pp.  303,  304. 


pusey's  double  dealing  267 

(and  subsequently  he  wrote  against  Papal  Infallibility) ;  but 
in  this  letter  of  his  to  Dr.  Wilberforce,  he  showed  his  faith, 
even  at  that  early  period,  in  Purgatory  and  some  Invoca- 
tion of  Saints.  In  what  he  said  on  these  doctrines  his 
double  dealing  and  Jesuitism  are  also  clearly  revealed  : — 

"  Practically,"  Pusey  wrote  to  Wilberforce,  "  when  people  come 
to  me  for  guidance,  /  endeavour  to  ivithhold  them  from  what  lies 
beyond  our  Church,  although,  if  asked  on  the  other  side,  I  could  not 
deny  that  such  and  such  things  seem  to  me  adfnissible. 

"  If  I  may  explain  my  meaning,  the  remarkable  Acts  of  S. 
Perpetua  and  Felicitas,  which  was  beyond  question  genuine,  con- 
tain a  very  solemn  vision, ^  which  involves  the  doctrine  of  a  process 
of  purification  after  death  by  suffering,  to  shorten  which  prayer  was 
available.  ...  I  had  interpreted  passages  (as  of  S.  Basil),  as  I  saw, 
wrongly,  under  a  bias  the  other  way ;  solemn  as  it  was,  I  could  not, 
taking  all  together,  refuse  my  belief  to  an  intermediate  state  of  cleans- 
ing, in  some  cases  through  pain.  ^  .  .  The  effect  has  been  that  I  have 
since  been  wholly  silent  about  Purgatory  (before  I  used  to  speak  against 
it).  I  have  not  said  so  much  as  this  except  to  two  or  three  friends. 
Some  of  my  nearest  friends  do  not  know  it? 

"  In  like  manner,  I  found  that  some  Invocatiofi  of  Saints  was 
much  more  frequent  in  the  early  Church  than  I  had  been  taught  to 
think,  that  it  has  very  high  authority,  and  is  nowhere  blamed.  This 
is  wholly  distinct  from  the  whole  system  as  to  S.  Mary,  as  what  I  said 
before  is  from  the  popular  system  as  to  Purgatory.  In  this  way,  then, 
and  partly  from  the  internal  structure  of  the  Article,  I  came  to  think 
that  our  Article  did  not  condemn  all  'doctrine  of  Purgatory'  or 
'  Invocation  of  Saints,'  but  only  a  certain  practical  system  which  the 
Reformers  had  before  their  eyes  ;  and  then  I  came  aftenvards  to  see 
that  the  actual  Roman  formularies  did  not  assert  more  on  these  subjects 
(as  apart  from  the  popular  system  or  '  Popery ')  than  was  in  the 
ancient  Church. 

'■^Practically,  then,  I  dissuade  or  forbid  (when  I  have  authority) 
Invocation  of  Saints ;  abstractedly  I  see  no  reason  why  our  Church 
might  not  eventually  allow  it,  in  the  sense  of  asking  for  their 
prayers."  ^ 

Double  deahng  of  this  kind,  on  Pusey's  part,  in  relation 
to  St.  Saviour's,  Leeds,  led  even  that  pronounced  Tractarian, 

^  Fancy  a  man  like  Pusey  basing  his  faiih  in  the  existence  of  a  Purgatory  on 
"  a  very  solemn  vision  1 "     There  was  no  basis  for  it  in  the  Bible. 

^  In  this  Pusey  acted  on  the  doctrine  of  "Reserve  in  Communicating  Religious 
Knowledge." 

*  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  i.  pp.  304,  305. 


2  68  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Dr.  Hook,  to  write  to  him,  on  December  19,  1846  : — "  Is 
this  conduct  that  can  be  justified  by  any  but  a  Jesuit  ?  Do 
not  mistake  me — I  do  not  think  you  are  a  Jesuit ;  but  I  be- 
Heve  you  to  be  under  the  influence  of  Jesuits.  Your  own 
representatives  here  say  as  much  ;  they  seem  to  admit  that 
you  were  only  the  puppet  while  others  pulled  the  strings."^ 

Of  Pusey's  correspondence  with  Wilberforce  Canon 
Liddon  writes  : — "  Anything  more  unhappy  than  such  a 
correspondence  as  this  cannot  well  be  imagined"  ;  and  he 
acknowledges  that  "  there  was  sufficient  in  Pusey's  letter  to 
excite  suspicion  in  the  mind  of  one  who  had  no  closer 
sympathies  with  the  Tractarian  Movement  than  had  Dr. 
Wilberforce  at  that  moment."  ^ 

The  question  of  the  Surplice  or  Black  Gown  in  the  pulpit 
came  again  prominently  before  the  public  in  1845.  The 
Bishop  of  Exeter  having  withdrawn  his  order  to  all  his  clergy 
to  preach  in  the  surplice  only,  it  was  felt  by  those  who  used 
the  surplice  that  this  order  was  not  one  commanding  them 
to  give  it  up.  Amongst  those  who  continued  it  were  the 
Rev.  Francis  Courtenay,  Vicar  of  St.  Sidwell's,  Exeter ;  and 
the  Rev.  Philip  Carlyon,  Vicar  of  St.  James',  in  the  same 
city.  On  January  loth  both  parishes  held  a  united  meeting 
"  to  consider  the  course  to  be  adopted  respecting  the  con- 
tinued use  of  the  surplice "  by  the  Incumbents  of  both 
parishes.  Several  resolutions  were  passed  (in  one  of  which 
it  was  acknowledged  that  "  the  use  of  the  surplice  in  the 
pulpit  was  introduced  before  the  present  Ministers  were  ap- 
pointed ")  and  the  Ministers  were  requested  to  discontinue 
the  use  of  the  surplice.  In  reply  the  Vicar  of  St.  Sidwell's 
positively  refused  to  grant  the  request ;  while  the  Vicar 
of  St.  James'  promised  to  do  what  the  meeting  asked  for. 
One  result  of  the  refusal  by  the  Vicar  of  St.  Sidwell's 
was  a  decision  to  build  a  "  Free  Church  "  in  the  district ; 
and  the  next  was  that  on  the  following  Sunday  after  his 
refusal  Mr.  Courtenay  saw,  on  entering  the  pulpit  in  his 
surplice,  two-thirds  of  the  congregation  arise  and  leave 
the  Church  in  a  body.  When  he  left  the  Church  he 
was   hissed  and   hooted  in  the  streets  on  his  way  to  his 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  iii.  p.  126. 

2  Ibid.  pp.  48,  49. 


THE    SURPLICE    QUESTION    AT    EXETER  269 

residence.  The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  tried  to  allay  the 
public  excitement  on  this  and  a  few  other  minor  matters, 
which  had  spread  throughout  the  country,  by  means  of 
a  Pastoral  Letter.  But  inasmuch  as  his  advice  was  that 
each  side  should,  for  the  time  being,  tolerate  the  other  side, 
no  peaceful  results  followed  from  his  exhortation.  The 
Vicar  of  St.  Sidwell's,  Exeter,  continued  to  preach  in  the 
surplice,  and  this  led  on  several  Sundays  to  riotous  pro- 
ceedings in  the  Church.  The  principal  inhabitants  of  the 
city  became  alarmed,  with  the  result  that  a  requisition  was 
addressed  by  the  Mayor  of  Exeter  and  the  Magistrates 
to  the  Bishop  of  Exeter,  to  use  his  influence  with  Mr. 
Courtenay  in  the  interests  of  peace.  The  Bishop  thereupon 
wrote  to  Mr.  Courtenay  : — "  I  advise  you  to  give  way,  at 
the  request  of  the  civil  authorities  of  Exeter,  and  not  to 
persist  in  wearing  the  surplice  in  the  pulpit,  unless  con- 
scientiously, and  on  full  inquiry,  you  have  satisfied  yourself 
that  your  engagements  to  the  Church  require  you  to  wear 
the  surplice  when  you  preach."  ^  On  this  Mr.  Courtenay 
very  properly  gave  way,  and  promised  to  preach  no  longer 
in  the  surplice.  But  this  concession  did  not  satisfy  his 
parishioners,  who,  on  the  day  after  it  was  made,  held  a 
meeting  at  which  a  resolution  was  unanimously  passed, 
asking  Mr,  Courtenay  to  resign  the  living,  and  declaring 
that  he  "  having  signified  his  consent  to  withdraw  the  sur- 
pHce,"  "  any  concession  now  is  insufficient  to  restore  him 
to  that  position  which  a  Pastor  should  hold  among  his 
parishioners."  One  result  of  the  agitation  at  Exeter  was  a 
petition  to  the  House  of  Lords  from  3200  adult  members 
of  the  Church  of  England  residing  at  or  near  Exeter,  com- 
plaining of  alterations  which  had  been  made  by  the  clergy 
in  the  mode  of  conducting  the  services  of  the  Church, 
which  had  "  endangered  the  peace,  union,  and  stability 
of  the  Established  Church."  It  was  presented  by  Earl 
Fortescue,  Lord  Lieutenant  of  Devon,  on  February  23rd, 
and  led  to  an  important  debate,  in  the  course  of  which  the 
Bishop  of  Exeter  defended  his  conduct  as  well  as  he  could, 
and  in  which  the  Bishop  of  Norwich  used  these  words  : — 

*  English  Churchman,  January  30,  1845,  P-  63. 


270  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

"  My  Lords,  as  this  question  refers  to  one  particular 
diocese,  ...  I  forbear  from  entering  into  the  discussion ; 
but  from  the  general  feeling  of  the  country,  and  particu- 
larly from  that  in  my  own  diocese,  I  can  venture  to  say  that 
there  is  a  determination  to  adhere  to  our  Protestant  faith, 
and  to  resist  any  innovation,  or  any  approach,  in  reality  or 
even  in  imagination,  to  anything  of  a  Roman  Catholic 
feeling,  and  I  rejoice  that  these  petitions  have  been  for- 
warded." ^ 

All  through  this  year  the  Puseyites  continued  to  repeat 
their  demand  for  the  prosecution  of  Protestant  clergymen 
who,  in  their  opinion,  had  broken  the  law.  I  may  here 
remark  that  there  is  no  reason  why  Evangelical  clergymen 
should  be  exempt  from  prosecution  should  they  break  the 
law  of  the  Church  ;  but  at  this  period  it  was  quite  expected 
that  in  this  way  they  would  be  able  to  suppress  those 
peculiar  doctrines  of  the  Evangelicals  opposed  to  the 
Romeward  Movement.  In  this  the  Puseyites  and  their 
successors,  the  Ritualists,  have  been  greatly  disappointed. 
A  very  few  of  the  Evangelical  clergy  may,  here  and  there, 
have  offended  against  the  law  on  some  minor  point  of  no 
importance  ;  but  these  are  mere  trifles  when  compared 
with  the  serious  breaches  of  the  law,  in  the  interests  of 
Sacerdotalism,  now  constantly  perpetrated  by  the  Ritual- 
ists, and  it  is  well,  in  this  connection,  to  remember  that 
Evangelicals  should  not  be  held  responsible  for  what  Broad 
Churchmen  do.  One  grave  cause  of  offence  to  their  op- 
ponents the  Protestant  clergy  gave  at  this  time,  by  mixing 
more  freely  amongst  orthodox  Nonconformists,  and  even 
giving  addresses  at  public  meetings  in  aid  of  religious  work 
conducted  by  Churchmen  and  Dissenters  combined.  This 
exhibition  of  Protestant  unity  was  peculiarly  distasteful  to 
men  who  were  sighing  for  unity  with  Rome.  The  English 
Churchman,  of  March  13,  1845,  expressed  great  satisfaction 
at  hearing  that  the  Bishop  of  London  had  prevented  three 
London  Incumbents  from  speaking  at  a  meeting  of  the  Welsh 
Calvinistic  Methodist  Foreign  Missionary  Society  ;  and  then 
it  continued  its  comment  in  the  following  style  : — "  So  far  so 

^  English  Churchman,  March  6,  1845,  p.  145. 


PRAYING    IN    UNCONSECRATED    PLACES  27 I 

good,  as  a  beginning,  and  we  trust  it  is  only  a  beginning, 
on  the  part  of  the  Lord  Bishop  of  the  Diocese.  We  trust 
that  the  meetings  of  the  London  City  Mission,  the  Rehgious 
Tract  Society,  and  other  Dissenting  schemes  for  promoting 
schism  in  the  Church,  will  no  longer  be  allowed  to  boast  of 
the  advocacy  of  the  clergy."  But  there  was  no  praise  from 
the  Puseyites  for  the  same  Bishop  of  London  (Dr.  Blom- 
field)  when,  only  two  years  before,  he  refused  to  allow  a 
clergyman  to  officiate  in  a  parish,  on  the  ground  that  in 
a  sermon  he  had  insisted  upon  the  necessity  of  Auricular 
Confession.  After  quoting  passages  from  the  sermon 
Bishop  Blomfield  wrote  to  the  preacher  : — "  I  wish  to 
give  you  an  opportunity  of  retracting  or  explaining  these 
erroneous  positions  ;  but  I  really  do  not  see  how  I  can 
safely  entrust  the  care  of  a  large  body  of  poor  ignorant 
people  to  a  teacher  who  either  holds  these  opinions,  or 
asserts  them  so  broadly  and  offensively,  without  a  clear 
understanding  of  what  he  says."  ^  Would  that  our  Bishops 
were  now  as  faithful  in  this  gravely  important  matter  as 
Bishop  Blomfield  was  in  1843.  And  why  should  they  not 
be  as  faithful  ? 

In  its  issue  for  September  4,  1845,  the  English  Church- 
man again  expressed  its  delight  on  hearing  that  the  Bishop 
of  Salisbury  had  threatened  to  prosecute  two  of  his  Evan- 
gelical clergy  for  what  it  termed  the  "gross  scandal  to  the 
Church  "  which  they  had  given  by  actually  preaching  in  an 
unlicensed  building  !  It  seems  that  during  the  previous 
month  a  Commission  appointed  by  the  Bishop  of  Salisbury, 
under  the  Church  Discipline  Act,  met  at  Upway,  for  the 
purpose  of  making  enquiry  whether  there  were  prima  facie 
grounds  for  prosecuting  the  Rev.  Samuel  Starky,  Rector  of 
Charlinch,  "  in  that  he  has  lately,  at  divers  times,  committed 
the  canonical  offence  of  preaching  and  publicly  praying,  in 
unconsecrated  places,  without  the  license  of  the  Ordinary 
thereof  ; "  and  for  prosecuting  the  Rev.  Octavius  Piers, 
Vicar  of  Preston,  in  Dorset,  for  "  having  been  present  at, 
and  aided  and  abetted  the  meetings  and  assemblies  lately, 
and  at  divers  times,  held  in  unconsecrated  places  within  his 

^  Memoir  of  Bishop  Blomfield,  vol.  ii.  p.  84. 


272  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

said  parish  of  Preston,  and  at  which  meetings  the  Rev. 
Samuel  Starky  and  other  persons  had,  as  alleged,  in  the 
presence  of  the  said  Octavius  Vitvs,  publicly  preached,  prayed, 
&c."  ^  The  Commission  reported,  after  hearing  evidence, 
that  there  was  2.  prima  facie  case  for  proceeding  against  the 
two  Evangelical  Incumbents. 

It  makes  one  justly  indignant  at  the  narrow-minded 
bigotry  which  would  actually  prosecute  a  man,  with  the 
hope  of  his  being  deprived  of  his  living,  or  at  least 
suspended  for  a  time,  for  the  sole  offence  of  "publicly 
preaching  and  praying"  in  an  unconsecrated  building,  and 
that  within  his  ozvn  parish  !  And  be  it  noted  that,  although 
Mr.  Starky  preached  in  Mr.  Piers'  parish,  he  did  so  with 
the  latter  gentleman's  full  knowledge  and  consent.  This 
is  a  chapter  in  the  History  of  the  Romeward  Movement  of 
which  the  Ritualists  ought  to  be  heartily  ashamed,  though 
I  sincerely  believe  that  if  they  had  the  opportunity  they 
would  even  now  imitate  the  disgraceful  conduct  of  the 
Puseyites  of  1845.  And  this  is  what  the  Puseyite  organ 
said  about  the  case,  when  the  good  news  came  to  its 
office  : — 

"  The  Commission  issued  by  the  Lord  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  to 
enquire  whether  there  are  grounds  for  proceeding  against  Mr. 
Starky,  and  the  notorious  Mr.  Octavius  Piers,  for  preaching  in 
unconsecrated  places,  without  the  license  of  the  Ordinary.  The 
latter-named  clergyman  has,  for  a  long  time,  caused,  in  various 
ways,  gross  scandal  to  the  Church.^  But  the  question  at  issue  is  of 
great  importance,  and  an  ecclesiastical  decision  upon  it  will  have 
a  most  extensive  influence,  especially  in  this  diocese,  where  the 
practice  of  extemporary  prayer  and  preaching  *  Cottage  Lectures '  in 
schoolrooms,  hard  by  the  Church,  is  of  common  occurrence."^ 

Of  course  these  two  excellent  Evangelical  clergymen 
had  committed  no  offence  against  the  law  whatever.  Appa- 
rently it  was  deemed  unadvisable  to  bring  the  case  into 
Court,  for  I  can  find  no  record  of  it  going  any  further. 

A  lawsuit  which  created  a  great  deal  of  public  interest 

^  English  Churchmatt,  August  28,  1845,  p.  544. 

^  I  suppose  the  "gross  scandal"  was  caused  by  such  conduct  as  preaching 
and  praying  in  unconsecrated  buildings. 

^  English  Churchman,  September  4,  1845,  p.  564. 


THE    CASE    OF    THE    REV.    JAMES    SHORE  273 

came  this  year  before  Sir  Herbert  Jenner  Fust,  in  the 
Court  of  Arches.  The  real  prosecutor  was  the  High 
Church  Bishop  of  Exeter,  who  seems  to  have  had  a 
far  greater  disHke  to  decidedly  Evangelical  and  Protestant 
truth,  than  to  any  imitations  of  Popery  in  his  diocese. 
He  prosecuted  through  his  Secretary,  Mr.  Ralph  Barnes. 
The  defendant  was  the  Rev.  James  Shore,  who,  until 
about  a  year  before  the  commencement  of  the  proceed- 
ings, had  acted  for  nearly  eleven  years  as  a  Minister  of 
Bridgetown  Chapel,  in  the  parish  of  Bury  Pomeroy,  with 
the  licence  of  the  Bishop  who  was  now  his  prosecutor. 
From  a  correspondence  on  the  case  which  Mr.  Shore 
published  in  1849,  while  he  was  in  Exeter  Gaol  through 
the  action  of  his  theological  opponents,  and  from  The 
Case  of  Mr.  Shore,  written  by  the  Bishop  of  Exeter,  I  find 
that  in  1843  the  late  Incumbent  resigned  the  living,  and 
a  Rev.  W.  B.  Cosens  was  appointed  in  his  room.  The 
Bishop  of  Exeter  sent  for  Mr.  Cosens  a  few  days  after  his 
institution,  and — to  quote  the  Bishop's  own  words,  given 
by  him  on  oath  at  the  Exeter  Assizes,  March  1848 — said  to 
him  : — "  I  apprehend  you  will  find  a  very  important  part  of 
your  parish,  or  of  those  souls  committed  to  your  charge,  to 
be  in  such  a  state  that  you  ought  to  take  especial  care 
whom  you  appoint  as  your  Assistant  Curate  at  Bridge- 
town "  1 — of  which  down  to  that  period  Mr.  Shore  had  been 
for  nearly  eleven  years  Curate.  Mr.  Shore  still  retained 
the  licence  given  him  by  the  Bishop  when  he  first  entered 
on  the  Curacy.  There  had  been  a  change  in  the  Incum- 
bency meantime,  before  the  arrival  of  Mr.  Cosens,  but  the 
licence  had  not  been  formally  renewed,  and  legally  did  not 
require  renewal.  The  Bishop  revoked  Mr.  Shore's  licence, 
and  then  demanded  that  he  should  obtain  a  new  nomina- 
tion to  the  Curacy  from  Mr.  Cosens,  or  cease  to  officiate  in 
Bridgetown.  Of  course,  after  such  a  hint  from  his  new 
Diocesan,  Mr.  Cosens  refused  to  nominate  Mr.  Shore.  The 
Bishop  had  for  a  long  time  disliked  Mr.  Shore's  decided 
Protestantism,  and  was  heartily  glad  to  get  rid  of  him. 
"  Doubtless,"   writes    Mr.  Shore,   "  my  views   of   doctrine, 

^  The  Case  of  the  Kev.  James  Shore,  M.A.     By  Himself.     In  Reply  to  the 
Bishop,  p.  16.     London  :  Partridge  &  Oakey.     1849. 

S 


2  74  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

being  so  opposed  to  Tractarianism,  might  have  excited  a 
prejudice  against  me  ;  but  there  is  something  further  and 
still  deeper.  It  is  evident,  from  the  principal  part  of  the 
Bishop's  pamphlet  now  before  me,  that  he  was  very  anxious 
to  get  the  Chapel  endowed  and  consecrated,  and  thus  more 
certainly  under  his  own  control."  ^  Had  the  Bishop  suc- 
ceeded in  his  ambition,  and  secured  Bridgetown  Chapel  by 
having  it  consecrated — which  it  had  not  been — he  would 
very  soon  have  sent  Mr.  Shore  about  his  business,  as 
a  known  opponent  of  the  Tractarianism  which  he  (the 
Bishop)  loved  so  dearly.  Mr.  Shore  tells  us,  and  I  see  no 
reason  to  doubt  the  statement  : — "As  showing  the  Bishop's 
determination  to  silence  all  who  oppose  the  Tractarian 
Movement,  I  may  here  mention  that  he  withdrew  his  licence 
from  a  friend  of  mine,  on  account  of  his  having  written  a 
note  condemning  Puseyism.  This  clergyman  waited  three 
years  in  silence,  in  the  hope  of  again  being  able  to  exercise 
his  ministry  in  the  Establishment,  but  finding  every  door 
shut  against  him,  he  built  a  chapel  for  himself,  in  which  he 
is  now  preaching  as  a  Dissenting  Minister."  ^  The  fact 
is  that  the  Bishop's  nature  was  tyrannical  :  he  could  not 
endure  contradiction  or  opposition,  least  of  all  from  the 
Protestant  Churchmen  of  his  diocese. 

Mr.  Shore,  having  failed  in  getting  a  new  nomination 
from  Mr.  Cosens,  as  Curate  of  Bridgetown  Chapel,  and 
having  gathered  around  him  a  large  and  deeply  attached 
congregation,  had  now  to  face  a  great  difficulty.  He  was 
certain  that  the  Bishop  would  eventually  refuse  to  licence 
him  to  any  other  Curacy  in  the  Diocese  of  Exeter,  and 
would  refuse  to  sign  his  testimonials  for  work  in  any  other 
diocese,  thus  shutting  him  out  of  any  future  work  in  the 
Church  of  England,  and  reducing  his  victim,  together 
with  his  wife  and  family,  to  a  state  of  abject  poverty,  if  not 
starvation.  What  was  he  to  do  under  such  painful  circum- 
stances ?  The  Duke  of  Somerset,  who  owned  Bridgetown 
Chapel,  at  this  juncture  offered  him  permission  to  continue 
the  use  of  the  chapel,  apart  from  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  at  the  same  time  secured  for  him 

^  The  Case  of  the  Rev.  James  Shore,  M.A.     By  Himself,  p.  i8. 
^  Il'id.  p.  1 8,  fiote. 


THE    CASE    OF    THE    REV.    JAMES    SHORE  275 

an  adequate  income  as  its  minister.  Mr.  Shore  decided 
that  he  would  accept  this  generous  offer,  and  in  order  that 
he  might  remove,  as  he  thought,  every  legal  difficulty  in 
the  way,  he  had  the  chapel  registered  as  a  Dissenting 
Chapel,  and  himself  took  the  necessary  oaths  declaring 
himself  a  Dissenting  minister,  as  required  by  the  Toleration 
Acts,  after  which  he  officiated  in  Bridgetown  Chapel,  using 
the  Liturgy  of  the  Church  of  England.  He  now  thought 
himself  safe  from  any  further  interference  from  the  Bishop 
of  Exeter ;  but  in  this  he  was  mistaken.  The  Bishop  de- 
cided on  prosecuting  him  in  the  Arches  Court,  for  the 
offence  that  he,  being  still  legally  a  clergyman  of  the 
Church  of  England,  had  unlawfully  officiated  in  Bridge- 
town Chapel  without  the  authority,  and  contrary  to  the 
monition  of  his  Diocesan.  Of  course  the  Bishop  might 
have  left  Mr.  Shore  alone,  unmolested  by  the  law,  with  its 
pains  and  penalties.  In  his  pamphlet,  Mr.  Shore  forcibly 
pointed  out  that  : — "The  late  Rev.  John  Hawker,  of  Ply- 
mouth, was  not  proceeded  against  by  the  Bishop.  After 
withdrawing  from  his  lordship's  jurisdiction,  Mr.  Hawker 
continued,  for  about  fifteen  years,  to  use  the  services  as  I 
use  them  at  Bridgetown — in  a  chapel,  too,  which  was 
designed,  when  erected,  for  the  Establishment ;  and  yet 
he  was  left  entirely  unmolested.  I  believe,  also,  that  Mr. 
Hawker  did  not  qualify  under  the  Toleration  Act,  as  I  did. 
Indeed,  I  have  not  been  able  to  find  one  single  seceding 
clergyman  who  has  so  qualified  except  myself ;  and  yet,  in 
every  other  diocese  throughout  the  land,  numbers  of  seced- 
ing clergymen  are  preaching  without  let  or  hindrance, 
whilst  I  for  doing  so  am  in  gaol."  ^  It  was,  therefore,  not 
without  reason  that  Mr.  Shore  complained  of  the  Bishop's 
action  towards  him  as  "  an  undue  and  oppressive  exercise 
of  the  law." 

Greatly  to  the  delight  of  the  Puseyites  the  action  against 
Mr.  Shore  was  pushed  forward,  and  at  length,  on  June  20, 
1846,  Sir  Herbert  Jenner  Fust  delivered  judgment  in  the 
Court  of  Arches.     He  said : — 

"  I  am  of  opinion  that  the  proctor  for  the  promoter  has  proved 
the  articles  charging  Mr.  Shore  with  having  been  guilty  of  publicly 

^  The  Case  of  the  Rev.  James  Shore,  M.A,     By  Himself,  pp.  22,  23. 


276  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

reading  prayers,  according  to  the  form  prescribed  by  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer,  and  of  preaching  in  an  unconsecrated  chapel 
without  a  licence ;  that  he  has  thereby  incurred  Ecclesiastical  cen- 
sure; and  that  he  must  be  admonished  to  refrain  from  offending 
in  like  manner  in  future.  Should  he  be  guilty  of  a  repetition  of 
this  offence,  it  will  be  not  only  against  his  Diocesan,  but  against 
the  authority  of  this  Court.  Though  this  gentleman  is  at  this 
moment  a  minister  of  the  Established  Church  of  this  land,  from 
which  office  he  cannot  of  his  own  authority  relieve  himself,  still  I 
do  not  think  I  am  entitled  to  depose  him  from  the  ministry.  I 
content  myself  by  pronouncing  that  the  articles  have  been  suffi- 
ciently proved.  I  admonish  Mr.  Shore  to  abstain  from  offending 
in  like  manner  in  future,  in  the  parish  of  Bury  Pomeroy,  and  in  the 
Diocese  of  Exeter,  and  elsewhere  in  the  Province  of  Canterbury; 
and  I  condemn  him  in  the  costs."  ^ 

Mr.  Shore  appealed  from  this  sentence  to  the  Judicial 
Committee  of  Privy  Council.  Their  lordships  gave  judg- 
ment on  February  14,  1848,  confirming  the  sentence  of  the 
Court  of  Arches.  Early  the  next  year  the  Rev.  James 
Shore,  still  owing  to  the  Bishop  of  Exeter  the  sum  of 
;^ii5,  3s.  5d.,  being  a  portion  of  his  lordship's  costs  in 
prosecuting  Mr.  Shore,  that  prelate  caused  the  unhappy 
defendant  to  be  arrested,  on  March  31,  1849,  and  com- 
mitted to  Exeter  Gaol,  there  to  remain  until  he  had  paid 
the  money.  And  there  he  might  have  remained  for  all  the 
High  Church  Bishop  cared,  were  it  not  that  some  friends 
of  Mr.  Shore  subscribed  the  money  needed,  and  then  he 
was  released  from  prison. 

It  was  not  until  1870  that  the  law  was  altered  under 
which  Mr.  Shore  suffered.  By  the  Clerical  Disabilities 
Act,  33  and  34  Victoria,  c.  91,  provision  is  made  by  which 
a  clergyman  can  resign  his  Orders  in  the  Church  of 
England,  free  from  any  penalty.  But  if  he  resigns  his 
Orders  he  can  never  again,  however  anxious  he  may  be 
to  do  so,  officiate  in  the  Church  of  England.  2 

^  Robertson's  Ecclesiastical  Reports,  vol.  i.  p.  399. 

'^  For  further  particulars  of  Mr.  Shore's  case,  see  The  Case  of  the  Rev.  /awes 
Shore,  in  Reply  to  the  Rev.  IV.  B.  Cosens.  By  the  Rev.  James  Shore,  pp.  25. 
London:  Partridge  &  Oakey.  1849.  An  Appeal  to  My  Fcllozu-Townsnun  on 
Behalf  of  the  Rez'.  James  Shore.  By  Sir  Culling  E.  Eardley,  Bart,,  pp.  24. 
Torquay  :  Elliott  &  Wreyford.      1849. 


"ENTIRE    ABSOLUTION    OF    THE    PENITENT"         277 

Dr.  Pusey's  suspension  for  two  years  from  preaching 
in  the  University  pulpit  ended  in  June  1845.  Ahhough  he 
did  not  expect  to  preach  again  until  the  following  February, 
Pusey  early  began  to  prepare  for  it.  He  sought  the  advice 
of  friends,  some  of  whom  were  anxious  that  he  should  preach 
again  the  sermon  for  which  he  had  been  condemned  by 
the  Six  Doctors.  Pusey's  opponents  were  not  idle.  On 
January  5,  1846,  the  Rev.  Charles  P.  Golightly,  of  Oriel 
College,  addressed  a  letter  to  the  Vice-Chancellor,  quoting 
some  passages  from  a  letter  written  by  Dr.  Pusey,  in  the 
previous  October,  to  the  English  Churchwan,  and  demand- 
ing that  before  he  preached  his  forthcoming  sermon  Pusey 
should  be  required  to  subscribe  again  to  Article  XXII. 
The  Vice-Chancellor,  however,  while  disapproving  of  several 
of  Pusey's  statements,  did  not  think  there  was  any  necessity 
to  grant  that  which  Mr,  Golightly  had  requested. 

The  sermon  was  preached  on  February  i,  1846,  and 
Pusey  took  for  his  subject.  Entire  Absolution  of  the  Peni- 
tent. Of  course  the  Cathedral  was  crowded  in  every  part. 
"  Every  inch  on  the  floor  of  the  Church,"  writes  a  friendly 
eye-witness,  "was  occupied.  Dr.  Pusey  had  to  move 
slowly  through  the  dense  mass  on  his  way  to  the  corner 
of  the  Cathedral  where  the  Vice-Chancellor  and  Doctors 
assemble,  visible  to  nobody  but  those  immediately  along 
the  line  he  had  to  pass ;  his  perfectly  pallid,  furrowed, 
mortified  face  looking  almost  like  jagged  marble."  ^  He 
took  for  his  text  John  xx.  21-23,  and  in  his  first  sentence 
referred  to  the  sermon  for  which  he  had  been  suspended  : 
"  It  will,"  he  said,  "  be  in  the  memory  of  some  that  when, 
nearly  three  years  past,  Almighty  God  (for  '  secret  faults ' 
which  he  knoweth,  and  from  which,  I  trust.  He  willed  to 
'cleanse'  me),  allowed  me  to  be  deprived  for  a  time  of  this 
my  office  among  you,  I  was  endeavouring  to  mitigate  the 
stern  doctrine  of  the  heavy  character  of  a  Christian's  sins." 
He  then  proceeded  to  preach  his  first  sermon  advocating 
Auricular  Confession  and  priestly  absolution.  He  had 
already  taught  it  in  his  adapted  Roman  books  :  now  he 
preached  it  from  the  University  pulpit.     The  time  had  not 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  iii.  p.  59. 


278  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

yet  come  for  himself  to  practise  what  he  had  so  long  urged 
on  others.  Throughout  the  sermon  it  is  assumed  that 
Confession  to  a  priest,  and  priestly  absolution,  are  God's 
ordinary  method  of  pardoning  sin,  and  cleansing  the  soul 
from  its  stains.  It  is  admitted,  in  one  passage,  that  those 
who  have  perfect  contrition,  provided  they  long  for  absolu- 
tion, are  absolved  directly  by  God  without  priestly  absolu- 
tion ;  but  this  is  also  the  teaching  of  Rome.  All  through 
the  discourse  Pusey  assumes  that  hardly  any  such  perfectly 
contrite  sinners  are  to  be  found  on  earth.  A  few  extracts 
from  the  sermon  itself  may  here  serve  to  give  my  readers 
an  idea  of  the  thoroughly  Popish  teaching  given  in  it : — 

"And  now,  brethren,  I  would  proceed  to  speak  of  that  great 
authoritative  act  [of  priestly  absolution],  whereby  God  in  the  Church 
still  forgives  the  sins  of  the  penitent."^ 

"  The  one  object,  as  I  have  explained,  of  this  series  of  sermons, 
is  to  minister  to  one  class  of  souls,  those  whose  consciences  being 
oppressed  by  the  memory  of  past  sin,  more  or  less  grievous,  long  to 
know  how  they  may  be  replaced  in  that  condition  in  which  God 
once  placed  them ;  and  now,  too,  my  object  is,  not  to  speak  of 
discipline  in  general,  or  what  were  best  for  the  Church  or  for  her 
members  generally,  but  of  that  mercy  which,  by  the  power  of  the 
Keys,  God  pours  out  upon  the  penitent.  This,  then,  is  probably 
one  ground  why  so  little  needed  to  be  said  in  the  New  Testament, 
as  to  the  forgiveness  of  sins  of  a  Christian  very  grievously  fallen, 
that  our  Lord  had  left  a  living  provision  in  His  Church,  whereby  [i.e. 
through  Auricular  Confession  and  priestly  absolution]  all  penitents, 
however  fallen,  should  be  restored."  ^ 

"Those  who  form  to  themselves  theories  of  remission  of  sin 
distinct  from  the  provision  laid  up  by  God  in  the  Church,  do  '  for- 
sake the  Fountain  of  living  waters,  and  hew  them  out  cisterns, 
broken  cisterns,  which  hold  no  water.'" ^ 

"Grievous  sins  after  Baptism  are  remitted  by  Absolution;  and 
the  judgment,  if  the  penitent  be  sincere,  is  an  earnest  of  the  judg- 
ment of  Christ,  and  is  confirmed  by  Him."  * 

"So  now,  as  soon  as  His  Priest  has,  in  His  Name,  pronounced 
His  forgiveness  on  earth,  the  sins  of  the  true  penitent  are  forgiven 
in  Heaven."^ 

^  Entire  Absolution  of  the  Penitent.     By  the  Rev.  E.  B.  Pusey,  D.D.,  p.  4. 
Oxford  :  Parker.     1846. 

2  Ihid.  pp.  14,  15.  2  Ibid.  p.  24,  *  Ibid.  p.  26. 

I*  Ibid.  p.  39. 


PUSEY  ON  ENFORCED  CONFESSION        279 

"  He  hath  not  left  us  comfortless,  but  hath  left  others  with  His 
authority,  to  convey  to  sinners  in  His  Name  the  forgiveness  of  their 
sins."  1 

"  It  may  be  one  of  the  fruits  of  the  Incarnation,  and  a  part  of 
the  dignity  thereby  conferred  upon  our  nature,  that  God  would 
rather  work  His  miracles  of  grace  through  man,  than  immediately 
by  Himself."  2 

When  the  sermon  was  published,  a  preface  of  seventeen 
pages  was  printed  with  it,  in  which  Pusey  said  that  the 
benefits  of  Auricular  Confession  and  priestly  absolution 
were  not  for  grievous  sinners  only;  but  also  "for  all  who 
can,  through  its  ministry,  approach  with  lightened,  more 
kindled  hearts,  to  the  Holy  Communion."  ^  He  even  went 
so  far  as  to  assert  that  it  was  open  to  the  Church,  even 
now,  to  "  enforce  "  private  Confession  to  priests,  should  she 
desire  to  do  so.  "  It  is,"  he  wrote,  "  a  matter  of  discipline, 
open  to  the  Church,  to  enforce  public  penance,  as  in  the 
Ancient  Church,  or  private  Confession,  as  now  in  the  Roman 
Church  ;  or  to  leave  the  exercise  of  it  to  the  consciences  of 
individuals."  *  Who,  after  such  a  statement  as  this,  can 
assert  that  Pusey  thought  enforced  Confession  wrong  in 
principle  ? 

In  this  sermon  Pusey  insisted  most  of  all  on  the  benefits 
of  priestly  absolution.  On  the  first  Sunday  in  Advent  (Nov- 
ember 29th)  of  the  same  year  he  preached  again  before  the 
University,  and  this  time  he  emphasised,  most  of  all,  the 
supposed  advantages  of  secret  Confession  to  priests.  But 
who,  on  this  occasion,  listening  to  his  pressing  exhortations 
to  Confession,  could  ever  have  dreamed  that  Pusey — though 
he  had  then  been  hearing  Confessions  for  eight  years — had 
never  been  to  Confession  himself  ?  He  had  urged  others  to 
wash  and  be  clean,  but  he  had  never  washed  himself !  He 
was,  in  this  matter,  like  the  ^Pharisees  of  old,  of  whom  it  is 
recorded,  "  they  say,  and  do  not."  Apparently  he  lacked 
the  courage  which  he  required  of  other  people.  Not  the 
least  remarkable  portion  of  Pusey' s  biography  is  the  story 
of  how  he  came  to  go  to  Confession  for  the  first  time,  soon 

^  Pusey 's  Entire  Absolution  of  the  Penitent,  p.  39. 

'^  Ibid.  p.  45.  ^  Ibid.  p.  viii.  *  Ibid,  p.  xv. 


2  50  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

after  his  second  sermon  on  Confession.     On  September  26, 
1844,  Pusey  wrote  to  Keble  : — 

"  I  am  so  shocked  at  myself  that  I  dare  not  lay  my  wounds  bare 
to  any  one  :  since  I  have  seen  the  benefit  of  Confession  to  others,  I 
have  looked  round  whether  I  could  unburthen  myself  to  any  one, 
but  there  is  a  reason  against  every  one.  I  dare  not  so  shock  people : 
and  so  I  go  on,  having  no  such  comfort  as  in  good  Bishop  Andrewes' 
words,  to  confess  myself  'an  unclean  worm,  a  dead  dog,  a  putrid 
carcase,'  and  pray  Him  to  heal  my  leprosy  as  He  did  on  earth,  and 
to  raise  me  from  the  dead  :  to  give  me  sight,  and  to  forgive  me  the 
10,000  talents;  and  I  must  guide  myself  as  best  I  can,  because,  as 
things  are,  I  dare  not  seek  it  elsewhere."  ^ 

This  is  indeed  sad  and  pitiful  language  coming  from  one 
so  intensely  in  earnest  about  his  own  soul's  salvation,  yet, 
apparently,  thinking  that  he  could  not  with  any  certainty 
obtain  the  pardon  he  longed  for,  direct  from  the  Saviour 
Himself!  He  was,  truly,  a  "blind  leader  of  the  blind." 
Later  on  he  wrote  a  pitiful  letter  to  Keble,  which  shows  how 
far  he  had  gone  wrong,  not  merely  in  Popish  error,  but  in 
Popish  superstition  also.  He  said  that  "  by  God's  mercy  " — 
it  ought  to  have  been  "  through  my  own  folly  " — he  was 
wearing  ^^  hair  cloth  "  again,  but  he  would  like  to  wear  "  some 
sharper  sort "  ;  and  he  should  "like  to  be  bid  to  use  the 
Discipline  " — a  lash  of  hard  knotted  cords,  with  which  to 
whip  his  bare  back  !  2  Two  days  after  he  preached  the 
University  sermon  last  alluded  to,  viz.,  on  December  ist, 
Pusey  went  down  to  Hursley  and  made  h\s  first  Confession 
to  Keble,  whom  he  ever  after,  until  Keble's  death,  took  for 
his  Father  Confessor. 

The  effect  of  Pusey's  Confessional  work  on  his  penitents 
is  thus  described  by  Dean  Boyle,  of  Salisbury,  who  was  at 
Oxford  at  this  time  : — "  I  have,  unfortunately,  had  many 
friends  who  submitted  themselves  to  Pusey  as  a  spiritual 
guide,  and  fully  adopted  his  theory  of  Confession  and  direc- 
tion, and  in  nearly  every  case  I  have  seen  traces  of  enfeebled 
intellect,  and  what  I  must  call  loss  of  real  inoral  perception. 
If  the  system  so  zealously  advocated  by  Pusey  were  ever  to 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  iii.  p.  96.  ^  Ibid.  pp.  100,  loi. 


TWO    BOOKS    ON    AURICULAR    CONFESSION  281 

be  generally  adopted,  a  bad  time  would  come  to  English 
homes."  ^ 

Hundreds  of  volumes  have  been  written  on  the  subject 
of  Auricular  Confession,  for  and  against  it.  It  is  manifestly 
impossible  in  a  work  like  this  to  deal  adequately  with  it. 
Besides,  this  book  is  written,  primarily,  for  the  use  of  those 
whose  minds  are  already  made  up  on  this  great  question  on 
Protestant  lines.  But  I  cannot  pass  away  from  it  without 
urging  my  readers  to  study  carefully  an  invaluable  work, 
reprinted  in  the  Library  of  Anglo-Catholic  Theology,  and 
issued  under  the  superintendence  of  a  committee,  of  which 
Dr.  Pusey  himself  was  a  member.  It  is  entitled  The  Peniten- 
tial Disciplhie  of  the  Primitive  Church.  By  Nathaniel  Marshall, 
D.D.  I  know  no  book  which  so  thoroughly  upsets  the 
claims  of  priestly  absolution  put  forth  by  Dr.  Pusey  and  the 
modern  Ritualists.  There  is  another  work  on  the  subject 
by  an  old-fashioned  High  Churchman,  published  in  1875, 
treating  the  question  in  a  masterly  manner,  historically  and 
doctrinally,  which  I  cannot  too  highly  commend.  It  is 
entitled  y4«  Examination  into  the  Doctrine  and  Practice  of  Con- 
fession, and  was  written  by  the  Rev.  William  Edward  J  elf, 
B.D.  It  seems  hard  to  understand  how  any  thoughtful 
person,  with  an  open  mind,  can  study  these  two  books 
without  rejecting  the  whole  sacerdotal  claim  of  Auricular 
Confession  and  Priestly  Absolution. 

The  Bishop  of  Winchester  (Dr.  Sumner)  had  this  year 
to  deal  with  a  remarkable  application  made  to  him  by  a 
clergyman  who  had  seceded  to  the  Church  of  Rome,  but 
was  now  anxious  to  be  permitted  by  his  lordship  to  officiate 
once  more  in  the  Church  of  England.  Since  leaving  the 
Church  of  Rome  this  clergyman  had  lived  in  retirement  for 
three  years  before  making  his  application.  The  Bishop 
replied  that  he  had  received  his  application  "with  emotions 
of  thankfulness  to  God,"  but  before  granting  his  request  he 
wished  for  fuller  satisfaction  as  to  the  "  entire  accordance 
of  his  present  opinions  with  the  doctrines  set  forth  in  the 
Articles  and  formularies,"  and  "  especially  in  regard  to  the 
principal  points  of  difference  between  our  own  Church  and 

^  Recollections  of  the    Very  Rev.   G,   D.  Boyle,   Dean   of  Salisbury,   p.    115. 
London  :  1895. 


282  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

that  of  Rome."  Before  receiving  the  clergyman's  reply  a 
remarkable  circumstance  was  made  known  to  the  Bishop, 
which  is  thus  described  by  his  biographer  : — 

"Meanwhile,  trustworthy  information  had  reached  the  Bishop 
that  the  clergyman  in  question  had  been  in  the  habit,  within  the  last 
few  months,  of  attending  a  Roman  Catholic  place  of  worship.  He 
accordingly  wrote  to  him  as  follows  : — *  I  think  it  necessary  to 
acquaint  you,  that  since  I  last  wrote,  a  statement  has  been  made  to 
me  to  which  I  am  desirous  of  calling  your  attention  in  the  first 
instance.   It  is  asserted  to  me,  on  the  authority  of  a  Roman  Catholic 

priest  at ,  that  so  recently  as  the  beginning  of  the  present  year, 

you  have  attended  at  the  celebration  of  the  Romish  service  in  the 
chapel  of .  It  becomes  necessary  for  me  to  put  to  you  the  ex- 
plicit question,  whether  this  allegation  is  true,  either  in  respect  of  the 
chapel  mentioned,  or  of  any  other  place  of  worship  of  the  Romish 
communion,  since  the  period  when  you  received  the  Sacrament  of 

the  Lord's  Supper  in Church,  as  a  declaration  of  your  desire 

to  return  into  the  communion  of  the  Church  of  England.' 

"  In  reply,  the  clergyman,  without  referring  at  all  to  the  charge 
brought  against  him,  begged  leave  to  withdraw  his  application  for 
permission  to  minister  again  in  the  Church  of  England."  ^ 

Conduct  like  that  of  this  clergyman  naturally  raises  the 
question,  was  he  simply  a  Jesuit  in  disguise  ? 

In  this  year  the  Puseyites  began  to  discuss  the  wisdom  of 
introducing  Retreats  into  the  Church  of  England.  Keble 
wrote  on  Ash  Wednesday  about  it  to  the  Rev.  W.  J.  Butler, 
Vicar  of  Wantage  (afterwards  Dean  of  Lincoln): — "Marriott 
wrote  me  word  that  he  thought  something  in  the  nature  of 
a  Retreat  might  be  managed  at  Leeds,  under  the  clergy  of 
St.  Saviour's.  But  failing  that  he  seemed  to  say  it  was 
not  impossible  that  he  might  be  able  to  do  something 
towards  such  a  plan,  especially  if  a  negotiation  succeeded 
which  he  was  then  engaged  in  with  Newman  for  the  loan 
of  the  house  at  Littlemore."  2  Butler  hailed  the  scheme 
with  delight,  as  a  means  of  propagating  the  Confessional 
amongst  the  clergy.  He  wrote  to  Keble,  on  March  5, 
1846  :— 

"  I  was  in  Oxford  for  but  one  day,  and  that  was  spent  entirely  in 
one  place.     Indeed,  I  went  there  merely  to  see  Dr.  Pusey,  and  to 

^  Life  of  Bishop  Sumner,  pp.  303-305. 
*  Life  and  Letters  of  Dean  Butler,  p.  34. 


RETREATS    AND    THE    CONFESSIONAL  283 

be  away  from  every  one  ;  I  don't  know  why  I  should  hesitate  to 
mention  it  to  you  ;  to  make  a  general  Confession  to  him.  Of  course 
my  thoughts  were  on  this  one  subject,  and  though  I  said  something 
to  him  some  days  before  in  London  about  the  Retreat,  yet  we  did 
not  recur  to  it.  I  can  only  say  that  I  feel  more  than  ever  anxious 
to  see  something  of  the  kind  established.  ...  As  far  as  I  know, 
though  many  are  desirous  to  make  a  Confession,  and  to  continue  it 
as  a  habit  through  life,  the  thing  is  all  but  impossible.  Those  few 
who  are  in  the  habit  of  taking  general  Confessions  are  fully  occupied 
without  the  addition  of  having  to  act  as  constant  spiritual  guides. 
But  men  might  go  to  a  Retreat  periodically,  and  there  receive  the 
advantage  of  regular  Confession,  and  the  continual  preparation 
for  it."i 

^  Life  and  Letters  of  Dean  Butler,  p.  35. 


CHAPTER    XI 

Trouble  at  St.  Saviour's,  Leeds — Secessions  to  Rome — Hook's  vigorous 
attack  on  Pusey — "  It  is  mere  Jesuitism" — "A  semi-Papal  colony" 
— Hook  hopes  all  the  Romanisers  will  go  to  Rome — Bishop  Phill- 
potts  prosecutes  a  Puseyite  clergyman — The  Cross  on  a  Communion 
Table — The  present  state  of  the  law  on  this  point — Reducing  the 
distance  to  Rome — Sackville  College,  East  Grinstead — The  Rev. 
J.  M.  Neale  inhibited — Freeland  v.  Neale — The  Gorham  Case — 
Judgment  of  the  Court  of  Arches — Judgment  of  the  Judicial  Com- 
mittee of  Privy  Council — Puseyite  Protest  against  the  Judgment — 
Dr.  Pusey  and  Keble  wish  to  prosecute  Gorham  for  heresy — Bishop 
Phillpotts  threatens  to  excommunicate  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury— The  Exeter  Synod — The  case  of  the  Rev.  T.  W.  Allies — His 
extraordinary  and  disloyal  conduct — His  visit  to  Rome — The  Pope 
tells  him  that  Pusey  has  "prepared  the  way  for  Catholicism" — 
What  Mr.  Allies  told  the  Pope — Allies  secedes  to  Rome — Corre- 
spondence with  Pusey  on  Auricular  Confession — Startling  charges 
against  Pusey — "  In  fear  and  trembling  on  their  knees  before  you" 
— "The  rules  of  the  Church  of  Rome  are  your  rules" — How  the 
Oxford  Movement  helped  Rome — Wilberforce  calls  Pusey  "a  decoy 
bird"  for  the  Papal  net — He  says  that  he  is  "doing  the  work  of  a 
Roman  Confessor" — The  Papal  Aggression — Lord  John  Russell's 
Durham  Letter— Bishop  Blomfield  on  the  Romeward  Movement — 
St.  Paul's,  Knightsbridge — St.  Barnabas,  Pimlico — Riots  in  St. 
Barnabas'  Church— Resignation  of  the  Rev.  W.  J.  E.  Bennett— St. 
Saviour's,  Leeds — Traitorous  resolutions  of  twelve  clergymen — A 
Confessional  inquiry  by  the  Bishop — The  Clergy  defend  questioning 
women  on  the  Seventh  Commandment. 

The  opening  of  the  year  1847  brought  with  it  worry  and 
trouble  for  Dr.  Pusey,  and  for  his  friend,  Dr.  Hook,  Vicar 
of  Leeds.  On  New  Year's  Day,  one  of  the  Curates  of  St. 
Saviour's,  Leeds,  the  Rev.  R.  G.  Macmullen,  with  two  lay- 
men from  the  same  parish,  seceded  to  the  Church  of  Rome. 
It  was  the  same  Mr.  Macmullen,  whose  Jesuitical  conduct 
with  regard  to  his  Degree  at  Oxford,  has  already  been 
described.  Pusey  had  sent  him  to  St.  Saviour's,  and  this 
was  the  result.     Hook  was  indignant.     He  wrote  to  Pusey 

two  days  before  the  actual  reception  of  Macmullen   into 

284 


"MERE    JESUITISM"  285 

the  Roman  Communion  : — "  You  are  aware  by  this  time 
that  Macmullen  and  his  dupes  have  gone  over  to  the 
Mother  of  Abominations,  guilty  of  the  deadly  sins  of 
heresy  and  schism.  Ward  [Vicar  of  St.  Saviour's]  and 
Case  remain,  I  suppose  to  make  more  dupes ;  though 
strong  measures  must  be  taken  on  my  part.  I  cannot 
permit  a  Church  and  establishment  to  remain  in  Leeds 
for  the  destruction  of  souls  without  seeking  to  abate  the 
nuisance."  ^  Things  must  have  gone  very  far  wrong  indeed 
before  such  a  pronounced  High  Churchman  as  Hook 
could  seek  to  put  down  as  a  "nuisance"  the  first  attempt 
to  illustrate  Tractarian  principles  in  practice.  The  Rev. 
Richard  Ward,  mentioned  by  Hook,  was  the  first  Vicar  of 
St.  Saviour's,  and  was  appointed  by  Dr.  Pusey.  He  had 
not  been  long  at  Leeds  before  trouble  arose.  As  late  as 
November  14,  1846,  Pusey  sent  word  to  Hook: — "  I  have 
entire  confidence  in  Ward,  as  a  loyal  son  of  the  Church  of 
England ; "  ^  to  which  assertion  Hook  replied  most  em- 
phatically : — "  Ward  is  7iot  loyal  to  the  Church  of  England. 
He  has  himself  told  me  and  written  to  me  that  to  the 
Church  of  England  he  could  not  defer."  ^  In  this  letter 
Hook  complained  bitterly  of  Pusey's  conduct : — 

"And  what  do  I  complain  of?"  he  asks.  "I  complain  of  your 
building  a  Church  and  getting  a  foot  in  my  parish  to  propagate 
principles  which  I  detest — having  come  under  the  plea  of  assisting 
me  to  propagate  the  principles  I  uphold.  I  complain  of  your 
having  selected  one  to  oppose  me  and  my  principles  who  approached 
me  as  a  friend,  and  who  now  admits  that  in  so  doing  he  did  wrong, 
and  that  before  he  undertook  to  oppose  me  by  causing  a  division  in 
Leeds,  he  ought  to  have  reflected  that  he  was  not  the  proper  person 
to  be  your  agent.  I  have  said  to  him,  and  he  has  wept — Et  tu, 
Brute!  It  is  really  cruel,  mere  Jesuitism,  thus  to  misrepresent  the 
injured  party — the  party  injured  through  an  excess  of  charity,  as  the 
persecuting  party.     It  is  wicked."  * 

Pusey  answered  by  telling  Hook  : — "You  are  no  more 
responsible  for  St.  Saviour's  than  for  London  "  ;  which  was 
almost  equivalent  to  telling  him  to  mind  his  own  business. 
But  Hook  was  not  the  sort  of  man  to  be  sat  upon,  or  to  be 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  iii.  p.  128. 

2  Ibid.  p.  119.  ^  Ibid.  p.  I20.  *  Ibid.  p.  120. 


2  86  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

moved  from  his  purpose  by  the  sickening  appeals  for  peace 
from  the  chief  cause  of  the  disturbance  : — "  You  tell  me," 
he  rejoined,  "  I  have  no  more  to  do  with  St.  Saviour's 
than  with  London.  Be  it  so.  But  if  my  neighbour  has  a 
hornet's  nest  close  to  my  garden  gates,  and  my  children 
are  likely  to  be  stung  by  them,  I  must  ask  him  to  remove 
the  nest,  or  I  send  to  the  constable.  And  if  there  be 
Romanising  at  St.  Saviour's,  I  shall  send  to  the  Right 
Reverend  Constable,  come  what  will."  i  After  some 
further  correspondence,  in  the  course  of  which  Hook 
termed  St.  Saviour's  Church  "  a  semi-Papal  colony,"  whose 
clergy  "proclaim  that  it  is  sinful  to  speak  against  the 
Church  of  Rome "  ;  the  Vicar  of  Leeds  again  demanded, 
on  December  30,  1846,  that  Pusey  should  induce  Ward 
to  resign  the  Vicarage  of  St.  Saviour's : — 

"I  called  upon  you  most  solemnly  in  the  name  of  the  Great 
God,"  wrote  Hook,  "  to  persuade  Ward  to  resign,  and  to  withdraw 
your  other  people.  It  is  now  too  late  to  do  this  entirely,  but  if  you 
have  any  sense  of  honour  or  of  justice,  you  should  withdraw  Ward 
and  give  the  presentation  to  the  Bishop.  I  must  take  steps  to 
denounce  you  and  your  followers  as  being  in  my  opinion  heretics. 
I  regard  you  as  such  from  your  last  letter.  If  your  view  of  the 
Eucharist  be  not  that  taken  by  the  Church  of  England,  instead  of 
bending  your  own  spirit  to  the  Church,  you  mubt,  as  you  say,  leave 
the  Church."  2 

The  result  was  that  Ward  resigned.  Pusey  asked  Arch- 
deacon Manning  to  suggest  a  new  Incumbent  in  his  room. 
He  does  not  seem  to  have  nominated  anybody,  but  he 
expressed  in  very  plain  language  (on  January  23,  1847)  ^^ 
Pusey  what  was  the  real  tendency  of  Puseyism.  "You 
know,"  he  said,  "  how  long  I  have  to  you  openly  expressed 
my  conviction  that  a  false  position  has  been  taken  up  in 
the  Church  of  England.  The  direct  and  certain  tendency, 
I  believe,  of  what  remains  of  the  original  Movement  is  to 
the  Roman  Church.  You  know  the  minds  of  men  about 
us  better  than  I  do,  and  will  therefore  know  both  how 
strong  an  impression  the  claims  of  Rome  have  made  upon 
them,  and  how  feeble  and  fragmentary  are  the  reasons  on 

^  Zi/e  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  iii.  p.  122.  ^  Ibid.  p.  128. 


PUSEY  REFUSES  TO  DENOUNCE  ROME      287 

which  they  have  made  a  sudden  stand  or  halt  in  the  Una 
on  which  they  have  been,  perhaps  insensibly,  moving  for 
years."  ^ 

There  were  those  who  thought  the  secession  of  the  Rev. 
R.  G.  Macmullen  a  thing  to  be  deplored  by  members  of 
the  Church  of  England.  Dr.  Hook  was  not  one  of  this 
class.  "To  true-hearted  '  members  of  the  Church  of 
England,"  said  Hook,  "the  departure  of  Mr,  Macmullen 
and  his  disciples  is  a  satisfaction  and  relief ;  we  may  hope  that 
all  Romanisers  will  follow  his  example.  I  have  no  sympathy 
with  the  cant  of  those  who  urge  us  to  retain  such  persons 
in  the  Church,  by  permitting  them  to  revile  at  will  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  English  Reformation.  I  am  told  that  Mr.  Mac- 
mullen would  have  laboured  in  the  Church  if  he  had  been 
permitted  to  act  thus.     I  rejoice  to  think  that  he  is  gone."^ 

Mr.  Gladstone  urged  Pusey,  in  view  of  the  secessions 
to  Rome  from  St.  Saviour's,  Leeds,  to  set  himself  right  with 
public  opinion  by  some  explicit  and  public  statement 
against  the  Church  of  Rome.  But  he  refused  to  do  so. 
On  February  8,  1847,  ^^  wrote  to  Mr.  Gladstone  : — "If  I 
did  say  anything  publicly  about  the  Church  of  Rome,  it 
would  be  that  no  good  can  come  of  this  general  declama- 
tion against  it,  without  owning  what  is  good  and  great 
in  it.  Many  feel  this,  who  love  the  Church  of  England 
deeply."  ^  Pusey's  kindly  feeling  towards  Roman  Catholics 
was  shown  the  previous  year,  in  the  statement  he  made  to 
his  brother  on  the  question  of  the  endowment  of  Roman 
Catholicism  : — "  For  myself,  I  hope  that  everything  done 
for  the  Roman  Catholics  will  work  to  good,  both  in  doing 
away  irritation  at  present,  and  tending  ultimately  to  bring 
us  together.  I  do  not  see  anything  to  object  to  in  giving 
seats  to  Irish  Roman  Catholic  Bishops,  or  endowing  Col- 
leges for  them,  or  paying  their  clergy  if  they  would  receive 
it.  I  do  not  see  anything  amiss,  or  any  principle  violated, 
in  doing  anything  positively  for  the  Roman  Catholics."  ^  In 
this  respect  Pusey  was,  beyond  doubt,  a  very  true  friend  to 
the  Church  of  Rome. 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  iii.  p.  135. 

^  Life  and  Letters  of  Dean  Hook,  vol.  ii.  p.  200. 

3  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  iii.  p.  146.  ■*  Ibid.  p.  171. 


2  88  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

In  the  month  of  May  1847,  the  Bishop  of  Exeter  pro- 
secuted one  joi  his  Puseyite  clergy,  the  Rev.  W.  G.  Parks 
Smith,  Incumbent  of  St.  George's  Chapel,  Torquay,  for  a 
breach  of  the  law  in  setting  on  the  Communion  Table  two 
Vases  of  Flowers,  and  a  Cross  two  feet  high,  wreathed  with 
flowers.  The  Bishop  had  for  several  years  attended  and 
taken  part  in  the  services  in  this  Chapel,  and  had  again  and 
again  entreated,  and  even  enjoined  Mr.  Smith  to  abstain  from 
all  changes  in  matters  not  required  by  the  Rubric  or  other 
law  of  the  Church  ;  but  Mr.  Smith  had  paid  no  attention  to 
his  Bishop's  wishes.  The  result  was  that  his  lordship  issued 
a  Commission,  under  the  Church  Discipline  Act,  to  inquire 
into  the  charges  brought  against  Mr.  Smith.  The  Com- 
mission met  in  the  Chapter  House  of  Exeter  Cathedral, 
and  after  hearing  evidence,  and  counsel  for  the  defence, 
decided  that  ?l  prima  facie  case  had  been  made  out  against 
the  defendant.  Thereupon,  it  was  announced,  on  behalf 
of  Mr.  Smith,  that  to  prevent  further  legal  action  he  would 
consent  that  the  Bishop  should  pronounce  sentence.  This 
his  lordship  did,  on  May  28th.  He  declared  that  Mr. 
Smith  had  acted  contrary  to  the  law  of  the  Church,  ad- 
monished him  not  to  offend  again  in  like  manner,  and 
ordered  him  to  pay  the  costs  of  the  proceedings.  The 
following  brief  extracts  from  the  judgment  are  interest- 
ing :— 

"  If  one  person  may  at  his  pleasure  decorate  the  Lord's  Table 
with  a  Cross,  another  may  equally  claim  to  set  a  Crucifix  upon  it 
— whilst  a  third  might  think  it  necessary  to  erect  some  symbol  of 
Puritan  doctrine  or  feeling — to  mark  his  reprobation  of  his  Roman- 
ising neighbour." 

"The  only  direction  in  the  Rubric  is,  'that  the  Table  at  the 
Communion  time  have  a  fair  white  linen  cloth  upon  it;'  and  the 
82nd  Canon  'appoints,  that  the  Communion  Table  shall  be  covered 
in  time  of  Divine  Service,  with  a  carpet  of  silk,  or  other  decent  stuff, 
and  with  a  fair  linen  cloth  at  the  time  of  ministration.'  This  must 
be  holden  virtually  to  exclude  all  else,  except  what  is  used,  or  may 
be  used,  in  the  service  itself.  If  any  one  ventures  to  go  further — to 
add  anything  which  he  may  deem  an  ornament — he  does  it  at  his 
peril." 

"  Such  a  thing  [as  the  use  of  the  material  Cross  on  the  Lord's 


REDUCING    THE    DISTANCE   TO    ROME  289 

Table]  was  never  heard  of,  during  more  than  the  first  three  centuries 
of  the  Christian  era ;  and  Durandas,  the  authority  relied  on  by  the 
defendant's  advocate,  for  saying,  that  '  the  proper  place  for  the  Cross 
is  the  Lord's  Table,'  was  a  Bishop  and  Canonist  of  the  thirteenth 
century ;  therefore  very  little  entitled  to  our  attention  on  a  question 
respecting  the  present  law  of  our  Church,  even  if  the  reasons  stated 
by  him  were  as  solid  as  they  are,  in  truth,  shadowy  and  contra- 
dictory." 1 

The  part  taken  by  the  Bishop  of  Exeter  in  this  case 
shows  that,  however  domineering  his  nature  might  be,  he 
was  prepared  to  prosecute  those  he  thought  law-breakers, 
quite  apart  from  their  ordinary  theological  views.  The 
present  state  of  the  law  as  to  the  use  of  the  Cross  on  the 
Communion  Table  is  thus  explained  by  Mr.  Whitehead  : — 
"  It  must  not,  however,  be  attached  to  the  Communion 
Table  or  placed  upon  a  ledge  immediately  over  the  Table, 
so  as  to  appear  to  form  one  structure  with  it,  and  it  makes 
no  difference  whether  it  is  fixed  or  moveable.  It  may,  how- 
ever, be  placed  on  the  sill  of  the  eastern  window,  five  feet 
above  the  Communion  Table,  or  it  may  surmount  a  Chancel 
screen.  Of  course,  in  no  case  may  it  be  an  object  of  super- 
stitious reverence,  or  carried  in  processions,  or  otherwise 
used  ceremonially."  ^  The  Bishop's  judgment  as  to  the  use 
of  Vases  of  Flowers  on  the  Communion  Table  was  over- 
ruled in  the  Court  of  Arches,  by  the  judgment  of  Sir  Robert 
Phillimore,  in  the  case  of  Elphinstone  v.  Purchas,  delivered 
on  February  3,  1870.  ^ 

The  leading  Puseyite  newspaper,  the  English  Churchman, 
in  a  leading  article,  very  clearly  revealed  the  real  object  of 
the  Puseyite  party.  It  said  : — "  With  those  who  seek  to 
reduce  the  distance  which  separates  us  front  Rome,  to  the 
narrowest  limits  which  a  due  regard  to  Catholic  faith  and 
practice  will  admit  of,  we  readily  and  heartily  avow  our 
sympathy."  * 

^  English  Churchman,  June  3,  1847,  where  a  verbatim  report  of  the  judgment 
is  printed. 

2  Whitehead's  Church  Law,  p.  103,  2nd  edition.  London :  Stevens  &  Sons. 
1899. 

^  Y\\\^YcaQi€'s>  Ecclesiastical  Judgments, '^^.  191,  192, 

*  English  Churchman,  October  7,  1847,  p.  745. 


2go  HISTORY    OP    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

The  Bishop  of  Chichester  (Dr.  Gilbert)  felt  it  necessary 
to  take  notice  of  the  affairs  of  Sackville  College,  East 
Grinstead,  an  institution  founded  early  in  the  seventeenth 
century  as  a  kind  of  almshouses,  consisting  of  a  Warden, 
two  Assistant  Wardens,  five  brethren,  six  sisters,  and  four- 
teen probationers.  In  the  month  of  May  1846,  the  Rev. 
J.  M.  Neale,  M.A.,  was  appointed  Warden,  and  as  such  con- 
ducted Divine  Service,  and  administered  Holy  Communion 
to  the  inmates  in  the  College  Chapel.  Early  in  1847  a 
complaint  was  made  to  the  Bishop  of  Chichester  as  to  the 
proceedings  in  the  Chapel,  w^hich  stated  that  a  Vulgate 
Bible  and  a  copy  of  the  Roman  Breviary  were  seen  there, 
that  there  was  a  "  suspicion  "  that  the  English  Bible  in  the 
Chapel  was  the  Douay,  and  that  a  large  Cross  was  erected 
on  the  Chancel  screen.  Mr.  Neale,  in  reply,  proved  that  the 
English  Bible  was  the  authorised  edition  with  notes ;  and 
asserted  that  there  could  be  no  valid  objection  to  having  a 
Latin  Vulgate  Bible  for  his  own  private  use ;  and  that  as  to 
the  Roman  Breviary,  he  was  engaged  at  the  time  in  Liturgi- 
cal studies  which  required  the  use  of  the  Breviary,  and  that 
it  had  been  accidentally  left  in  the  Chapel  by  mistake.  On 
April  12,  1847,  the  Bishop  wrote  to  Mr.  Neale  requesting 
him  to  have  the  goodness  to  communicate  with  him  before 
he  officiated  "  in  any  Church  or  Chapel "  in  the  Diocese.  Mr. 
Neale  thereupon  informed  the  Bishop  that  Sackville  College 
was  outside  his  jurisdiction,  and  therefore  no  licence  was 
needed  to  officiate  in  it,  since  he  was  only  doing  so  as  the 
head  of  a  private  family.  On  May  7th  the  Bishop  had  an 
interview  with  Mr.  Neale  in  the  vestry  of  East  Grinstead 
Church,  of  which  the  latter  gentleman  subsequently  pub- 
lished a  report.  Mr.  Neale  informed  him  that  he  person- 
ally would  prefer  to  have  his  lordship's  licence  to  ofBciate, 
but  his  wishes  had  been  overruled  by  the  authorities  of  the 
College  ;  on  which  the  Bishop  remarked  : — "  I  ought  to 
say  that  I  probably  might  not  have  been  disposed  to  grant 
the  licence.  I  could  not,  if  the  reports  which  I  have  heard  of 
Romanistic  proceedings  in  the  College  be  true."  Later  on 
in  the  day  the  Bishop  went  with  Mr.  Neale  and  a  "  Mr.  H." 
— who  had  first  called  the  Bishop's  attention  to  what  was 


THE    EAST    GRINSTEAD    CASE  29 1 

going  on — to  the  College  Chapel.     What  took  place  therein 
is  thus  reported  by  Mr.  Neale  : — 

"Bishop — 'I  am  not  here  with  visitatorial  authority;  if  I  were, 
I  should  sweep  away  all  that ' — (pointing  to  the  altar). 

"  Mr.  H. — '  Flowers  and  all,  my  Lord  ? ' 

"  I  SAID—'  The  Altar,  my  Lord  ? ' 

"  Bishop — '  I  know  nothing  of  Altars  ;  the  Church  of  England 
knows  nothing  of  Altars  or  sacrifices.  I  would  retain  a  decent  low 
Table.  I  would  not  feed  Christ's  little  ones  with  the  wood  of  the 
Cross.'"! 

On  the  very  next  day  the  Bishop  sent  Mr.  Neale  a 
formal  Inhibition  "from  celebrating  Divine  Worship,  and 
from  the  exercise  of  clerical  functions  in  my  Diocese." 
With  the  Inhibition  he  sent  the  following  letter  : — "  I  can- 
not transmit  to  you  the  following  Inhibition  without  adding 
a  fervent  prayer  that  God  may  be  pleased  to  open  your 
eyes  to  the  dishonour  done  to  Him  by  supposing  that  His 
spiritual  service  can  be  promoted  by  presenting  to  the  eyes 
and  thoughts  of  worshippers  the  frippery  with  which  you 
have  transformed  the  simplicity  of  the  Chapel  at  Sackville 
College  into  an  imitation  of  the  degrading  superstitions  of 
an  erroneous  Church."  ^ 

Mr.  Neale  simply  ignored  the  Inhibition,  and  went  on 
conducting  the  services  in  the  Chapel  as  though  nothing 
had  happened.  The  Bishop  seems  to  have  left  him  alone 
for  five  months,  but  then,  finding  him  still  rebellious,  he 
sent  the  case  on  for  trial  in  the  Court  of  Arches.  On  June 
3,  1848,  the  case — Freeland  v.  Neale — was  heard  by  Sir  H. 
Jenner  Fust,  who  delivered  judgment  the  same  day.  He 
said  : — 

"  I  should  like  to  have  heard  some  authority  for  the  statement 
that  a  number  of  persons  constituting  a  corporation,  as  the  inhabit- 
ants of  Sackville  College  are  said  to  be,  is  a  private  family.  It  is 
possible  that  the  inmates  of  the  College  may  be  under  one  continu- 
ous roof,  that  they  have  one  common  table,  but  those  circum- 
stances will  not  render  them  a  private  family  or  household;  each 
member  has,  I  presume,  his  separate  apartments  allotted.  ...  It  is 
impossible  then  to  say  that  this  was  an  assemblage  of  a  private 

^  A  Statement  of  Proceedings  against  the   Warden  of  Sackville  College,  p.  9. 
London  :  Joseph  Masters.     1853. 
*  Ibid.  p.  9. 


292  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

family.  In  Barnes  v.  Shore  I  said,  what  I  now  rep:.'at,  that  where 
two  or  three  are  gathered  together,  who  do  not  strictly  form  a  part 
of  a  family,  there  is  a  congregation,  and  the  reading  to  them  the 
service  of  the  Church  is  a  reading  m  public.  I  am  of  opinion  that 
Mr.  Neale  is  proved  guilty  of  an  ecclesiastical  offence."  ^ 

The  Judge  thereupon  admonished  Mr.  Neale  not  to 
offend  any  more,  and  condemned  him  to  pay  the  costs  of 
the  proceedings.  It  was  remarkable  that  the  very  law 
which  the  Puseyites  had  put  into  operation  against  the 
Rev.  James  Shore,  should  now  be  used  against  one  of  their 
own  party.  Both  were  charged  with  and  condemned  for 
the  same  offence  ;  the  only  difference  being  that  Mr. 
Shore  admitted  that  he  officiated  in  public,  which  Mr.  Neale 
denied,  though  his  denial  had  no  effect  upon  his  Judge. 
When  the  Protestant  Mr.  Shore  was  condemned,  the  Pusey- 
ites shouted  for  joy  ;  but  when  Mr.  Neale  was  condemned, 
they  howled  with  indignation. 

I  respectfully  suggest  that  the  case  of  Mr.  Neale  has  its 
lesson  for  our  own  day  and  generation.  In  almost  every 
Diocese  private  Chapels  and  Oratories  are  set  up  in 
Convents  and  Monasteries,  where  lawless  and  thoroughly 
Romanising  services  are  performed.  All  such  services  are, 
as  we  have  seen,  illegal  without  the  consent  and  licence  of 
the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese.  But  what  do  we  find  ?  Instead 
of  Inhibiting  the  clergy  who  officiate  in  these  Oratories,  the 
Bishops  actually  grant  them  their  licences  to  officiate.  It 
is  within  their  power  to  put  a  stop,  with  a  stroke  of  their 
pen,  to  all  the  Romanising  extravagances  which  take  place 
in  these  buildings  ;  but  they  do  nothing  at  all,  unless  it  be 
to  grant  the  law-breakers  their  Episcopal  permission  to 
officiate.  After  which  they  have  the  daring  to  go  into  the 
House  of  Lords,  and  tell  the  country  that  the  Bishops  are 
doing  everything  in  their  power  to  put  down  lawlessness  ! 

The  commencement  of  the  celebrated  Gorham  Case 
dates  from  the  month  of  August  1847,  when  the  Lord 
Chancellor  Cottenham  nominated  the  Rev.  George  Cor- 
nelius Gorham  to  the  living  of  Brampford  Speke,  in  the 
Diocese  of  Exeter.     Mr.  Gorham  was  a  scholar  of  repute, 

1  Robertson's  Ecclesiastical  Reports,  vol.  i.  pp.  650,  651. 


THE    GORHAM    CASE  293 

having  been  formerly  a  Fellow  of  Queen's  College,  Cam- 
bridge. He  had  been  in  Holy  Orders  thirty-six  years  at  the 
time  of  his  nomination,  had  served  in  six  dioceses,  and  bore 
an  unblemished  character  and  a  high  reputation.  In  1846 
he  had  been  presented  by  Lord  Chancellor  Lyndhurst  to  the 
living  of  St.  Just-in-Penwith,  at  that  time  in  the  Diocese  of 
Exeter,  and  while  there  had  incurred  the  wrathful  indigna- 
tion of  his  Diocesan,  Bishop  Phillpotts,  by  advertising  for 
a  Curate  "free  from  Tractarian  error."  When,  in  the 
following  year,  Mr.  Gorham  was  presented  to  Brampford 
Speke,  his  Bishop  had  neither  forgotten  nor  forgiven  his 
alleged  offence  ;  and  showed  his  displeasure  by  refusing  to 
institute  him,  until  after  he  had  examined  him  as  to  his 
soundness  in  the  faith.  The  Bishop's  doubts  centred  round 
one  point  of  doctrine  only.  He  believed  that  Mr.  Gorham 
held  Evangelical  views  as  to  Baptismal  Regeneration,  and 
he  considered  that  any  one  holding  such  views  had  no 
right  to  minister  in  the  Church  of  England.  Hence  arose 
one  of  the  most  important  theological  contests  which  the 
Church  of  England  had  witnessed  since  the  Protestant 
Reformation.  On  its  issue  depended  the  question  whether 
Evangelical  clergymen  should  be  banished  from  the  Church 
of  England.  It  could  not  be  disputed  that  men  holding 
their  views  as  to  Baptismal  Regeneration  had  officiated  in 
our  Reformed  Church  since  the  Reformation,  nor  that  the 
overwhelming  majority  of  the  Reformers  held  their  views. 
What  the  Puseyites  aimed  at  was  the  capture  of  the  Church 
of  England  for  themselves,  and  to  banish  for  ever  decided 
Protestantism  from  its  fold.  I  have  no  doubt  that  these 
results  would  have  followed  the  victory  of  their  cause  in 
the  Gorham  Case.  But,  thank  God,  they  failed,  and  vic- 
tory remained  on  the  side  of  God's  truth  and  Evangelical 
principles. 

Mr.  Gorham  humbly  submitted  to  the  Bishop  of  Exe- 
ter's examination,  though  he  might,  considering  his  learning 
and  past  career,  have  justly  objected  to  being  treated  as 
though  he  were  some  ignorant  young  curate  just  fresh 
from  College.  When  Mr.  Gorham  had  thus  placed  himself 
in  the  Bishop's  hands,  he  found  it  no  easy  task  to  get  out 


2  94  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

again.  The  examination  was  inquisitorial  and  prolonged. 
It  began  on  December  17th,  and  was  continued  at  intervals 
until  the  loth  of  March,  1848,  during  which  time  Mr. 
Gorham  had  to  write  answers  to  no  fewer  than  149  questions 
on  the  single  subject  of  Baptismal  Efficacy  !  It  looked  as 
though  the  Bishop  wanted  to  worry  his  victim  to  the  utmost 
of  his  power.  The  day  after  the  examination  ended,  the 
Bishop  signified  his  decision  to  refuse  to  institute  Mr. 
Gorham  to  the  living  of  Brampford  Speke,  on  the  ground 
of  unsoundness  of  doctrine,  as  revealed  by  him  in  the 
examination. 

As  quickly  as  possible  after  the  Bishop's  refusal  to  insti- 
tute, the  case  was  brought  into  the  Court  of  Arches.  The 
Dean  of  Arches  (Sir  H.  Jenner  Fust)  thereupon  issued  a 
monition  to  the  Bishop  of  Exeter  to  show  cause  why  he 
should  not  institute  Mr.  Gorham  within  fifteen  days — failing 
which  the  Dean  would  himself  proceed  to  institute  him. 
The  case  did  not  come  before  the  Court  on  its  merits  until 
February  17,  1849.  On  August  2,  1849,  Sir  H.  Jenner  Fust 
delivered  a  lengthy  judgment,  concluding  as  follows  : — 

"Therefore  I  say,  that  as  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England 
undoubtedly  is,  that  children  baptized  are  regenerated  at  Baptism, 
and  are  undoubtedly  saved  if  they  die  without  committing  actual 
sin,  Mr.  Gorham  has  maintained  and  does  maintain  opinions 
opposed  to  that  Church  of  which  he  professes  himself  a  member 
and  Minister.  The  only  remaining  question  is,  has  the  Bishop 
shown  sufificient  cause  why  he  should  not  institute  Mr.  Gorham 
to  the  Vicarage  of  Brampford  Speke?  I  am  clearly  of  opinion 
that  the  Bishop  has,  by  reason  of  the  premises,  shown  suflficient 
cause;  that  consequently  he  is  entitled  to  be  dismissed,  and  must 
be  dismissed,  according  to  the  usual  course,  with  costs."  ^ 

Of  course  Mr.  Gorham  appealed  against  this  judgment 
to  the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council,  and  it  was 
well  for  the  Evangelical  cause  that  he  did  so.  The  case 
was  heard  before  the  Judicial  Committee  on  December  11, 
1849.  The  proceedings  lasted  four  days.  The  case  of  the 
Bishop  of  Exeter  rested  on  a  book  which  Mr.  Gorham 
had  published,  containing  the  replies  he  had  given  in  the 

^  Robertson's  Ecclesiastical  Reports,  vol.  ii.  pp.  103,  104. 


MR.    GORHAM'S    doctrine  295 

Bishop's  examination.^  It  is  impossible,  nor  is  it  necessary, 
to  find  room  here  for  the  very  lengthy  passages  in  this 
book  relied  on  by  the  Bishop  to  prove  that  Mr.  Gorham 
held  unsound  doctrine  as  to  Baptismal  Regeneration.  A 
summary  of  Mr.  Gorham's  views  on  this  important  subject 
was  given  by  the  Judicial  Committee  in  their  judgment  on 
March  8,  1850,  which  will  serve  to  supply  my  readers  with 
an  idea  of  what  he  held,  and  for  holding  which  he  was 
acquitted  by  the  Court.  I  know  the  Bishop  of  Exeter  sub- 
sequently denied  its  accuracy,  but  in  this  I  venture  to  differ 
from  him.  Anyhow,  it  is  the  teaching  which  the  judgment 
declared  was  not  contrary  to  the  Church  of  England  : — 

"  The  doctrine  held  by  Mr.  Gorham,"  said  the  Judicial  Com- 
mittee, "appears  to  be  this — that  Baptism  is  a  Sacrament  generally 
necessary  to  salvation,  but  that  the  grace  of  regeneration  does  not 
so  necessarily  accompany  the  act  of  Baptism,  that  regeneration 
invariably  takes  place  in  Baptism;  that  the  grace  may  be  given 
before,  in,  or  after  Baptism;  that  Baptism  is  an  effectual  sign  of 
grace,  by  which  God  works  invisibly  in  us,  but  only  in  such  as 
worthily  receive  it — in  them  alone  it  has  a  wholesome  effect ;  and 
that,  without  reference  to  the  qualification  of  the  recipient,  it  is  not 
in  itself  an  effectual  sign  of  grace.  That  infants  baptized,  and 
dying  before  actual  sin,  are  certainly  saved ;  but  that  in  no  case  is 
regeneration  in  Baptism  unconditional. 

"These  being,"  continued  their  lordships,  "as  we  collect  them, 
the  opinions  of  Mr,  Gorham,  the  question  which  we  have  to  decide 
is,  not  whether  they  are  theologically  sound  or  unsound — not  whether 
upon  some  of  the  doctrines  comprised  in  the  opinions,  other  opinions 
opposite  to  them  may  or  may  not  be  held  with  equal  or  even  greater 
reason  by  other  learned  and  pious  Ministers  of  the  Church ;  but 
whether  these  opinions  now  under  our  consideration  are  contrary  or 
repugnant  to  the  doctrines  which  the  Church  of  England,  by  its 
Articles,  Formularies,  and  Rubrics,  requires  to  be  held  by  its  Mini- 
sters, so  that  upon  the  ground  of  those  opinions  the  appellant  can 
lawfully  be  excluded  from  the  benefice  to  which  he  has  been  pre- 
sented." 2 

The  judgment  entered  at  great  length  into  the  argu- 

^  Examination  before  Adtnission  to  a  Benefice  hy  the  Bishop  of  Exeter.  By 
the  Clerk  Examined,  George  Cornelius  Gorham,  B.D.,  pp.  xlvii.,  230.  London  : 
Hatchard  &  Son.     1S48. 

*  Brodrick  and  Freemantle'syi^^.-^w^w/i-  of  the  Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy 
Coiincil,  p.  89. 


296  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

ments  which  had  been  brought  forward  in  the  case  both 
for  and  against  Mr.  Gorham.  It  will  be  sufficient  for  my 
purpose  to  give  from  it  the  following  extracts  : — 

"  The  Services  abound  with  expressions  which  must  be  construed 
in  a  charitable  and  qualified  sense,  and  cannot  with  any  appearance 
of  reason  be  taken  as  proofs  of  doctrine.  Our  principal  attention 
has  been  given  to  the  Baptismal  Services  ;  and  those  who  are  strongly 
impressed  with  the  earnest  prayers  which  are  offered  for  the  Divine 
blessing,  and  the  grace  of  God,  may  not  unreasonably  suppose  that 
the  grace  is  not  necessarily  tied  to  the  rite  ;  but  that  it  ought  to  be 
earnestly  and  devoutly  prayed  for,  in  order  that  it  may  then,  or  when 
God  pleases,  be  present  to  make  the  rite  beneficial."  ^ 

"  This  Court,  constituted  for  the  purpose  of  advising  her  Majesty 
in  matters  which  come  within  its  competency,  has  no  jurisdiction 
or  authority  to  setde  matters  of  faith,  or  to  determine  what  ought  in 
any  particular  to  be  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England.  Its 
duty  extends  only  to  the  consideration  of  that  which  is  by  law  estab- 
Hshed  to  be  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England,  upon  the  true 
and  legal  construction  of  her  Articles  and  Formularies  ;  and  we  con- 
sider that  it  is  not  the  duty  of  any  Court  to  be  minute  and  rigid  in 
cases  of  this  sort.  We  agree  with  Sir  William  Scott  in  the  opinion 
which  he  expressed  in  Stone's  case,  in  the  Consistory  Court  of 
London — 'That  if  any  Article  is  really  a  subject  of  dubious  inter- 
pretation, it  would  be  highly  improper  that  this  Court  should  fix  on 
one  meaning,  and  prosecute  all  those  who  hold  a  contrary  opinion 
regarding  its  interpretation.' 

"  In  the  examination  of  this  case,  we  have  not  relied  on  the 
doctrinal  opinions  of  any  of  the  eminent  writers,  by  whose  piety, 
learning,  and  ability  the  Church  of  England  has  been  distinguished; 
but  it  appears  that  opinions,  which  we  cannot  in  any  important 
particular  distinguish  from  those  entertained  by  Mr.  Gorham,  have 
been  propounded  and  maintained,  without  censure  or  reproach,  by 
many  eminent  and  illustrious  prelates  and  divines  who  have  adorned 
the  Church  from  the  time  when  the  Articles  were  first  established. 
We  do  not  affirm  that  the  doctrines  and  opinions  of  Jewel,  Hooker, 
Usher,  Jeremy  Taylor,  Whitgift,  PearsoUj  Carlton,  Prideaux,  and 
many  others,  can  be  received  as  evidence  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Church  of  England;  but  their  conduct,  unblamed  and  unquestioned 
as  it  was,  proves,  at  least,  the  liberty  which  has  been  allowed  of 
maintaining  such  doctrine."  ^ 

^  Brodrick  and  FreemaLntWs/itdifmen^s  of  the  Jtidicial  Committee  of  the  Privy 
Council,  p.  loi.  2  ji,j^  pp_  iQ2^  103. 


THE    GORHAM    JUDGMENT  297 

"  His  Honour  the  Vice-Chancellor  Knight  Bruce,  dissents  from 
our  judgment,  but  all  the  other  members  of  the  Judicial  Committee, 
who  were  present  at  the  hearing  of  the  case  (those  who  are  now 
present,  and  Baron  Parke,  who  is  unavoidably  absent  on  circuit),  are 
unanimously  agreed  in  opinion;  and  the  judgment  of  their  lordships 
is,  that  the  doctrine  held  by  Mr.  Gorham  is  not  contrary,  or  repug- 
nant to  the  declared  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England  as  by  law 
established,  and  that  Mr.  Gorham  ought  not,  by  reason  of  the 
doctrine  held  by  him,  to  have  been  refused  admission  to  the  Vicar- 
age of  Brampford  Speke."  ^ 

Of  the  three  Episcopal  Assessors  in  the  case,  two  agreed 
with  the  judgment  (the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  and 
York),  and  one  dissented  from  it' — the  Bishop  of  London. 
Amongst  those  who  were  in  Court  during  the  dehvery 
of  this  important  judgment  were  Baron  Bunsen  and 
Cardinal  Wiseman.  The  former  sent  his  son,  on  the 
same  day,  an  account  of  the  proceedings,  from  which 
I  take  the  following  interesting  extract  :  —  "I  am  this- 
moment  come  from  the  Privy  Council,  and  have  heard 
the  most  remarkable  judgment  pronounced,  which  since 
the  Reformation  and  the  Civil  Wars  has  ever  been  given 
in  this  country  on  a  great  point  of  faith.  ...  I  sat  on 
the  Privy  Council  seats,  behind  the  right  hand  side  of  the 
judges,  along  with  Dr.  Wiseman  !  Going  out  I  met  W. 
Goode  (the  protagonist  of  the  Evangelicals),  with  whom 
I  shook  hands,  and  who  was  blissful ;  then  my  way  was 
stopped  in  the  lobby  by  two  persons — and  who  were  they  ? 
Archdeacon  Wilberforce  and  Hope.  They  drooped  their 
heads,  and  after  some  silence,  going  on  and  I  following 
them.  Archdeacon  W.  said,  '  Well,  at  least,  there  is  no 
mistake  about  it.'     In  which  I  heartily  concur."  - 

The  immediate  effect  of  the  judgment  on  Archdeacon 
Manning  and  his  friends  was  related  by  him  many  years 
later,  when  he  was  a  Roman  Cardinal  : — 

"  I  remember  well,"  he  said,  "  I  was  in  London  when  it  was 
given.  I  went  at  once  to  Gladstone,  who  then  lived  in  Carlton 
Terrace.  He  was  ill  with  influenza  and  in  bed ;  I  sat  down  by 
his    bedside    and    told   him   of  the   judgment.      Starting   up   and 

^  Brodrick  and  Freemantle's  yw^w^w/j  of  the  Judicial  Co//it/iil(ee  of  the  i'rivy 
Council,  p.  105.  ^  Memoirs  of  Baron  Bunsen,  vol.  ii.  pp.  245,  246. 


298  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

throwing  out  his  arms,  he  exclaimed  : — '  The  Church  of  England 
has  gone  unless  it  releases  itself  by  some  authoritative  act.'  We 
then  agreed  to  draw  up  a  Declaration  and  get  it  signed.  For  this 
purpose  we  met  in  the  vestry  of  St.  Paul's,  Knightsbridge.  There 
were  present  Bennett,  Hope,  Richard  Cavendish,  Gladstone,  and  Dr. 
Mill,  I  think,  and  some  others.  They  made  me  preside.  We  agreed 
to  a  string  of  propositions,  deducing  that,  by  the  Gorham  judgment, 
the  Church  of  England  had  forfeited  its  authority  as  a  divine 
teacher.  The  next  time  we  met,  Pusey  and  Keble,  I  think,  were 
there.  They  refused  this,  and  got  it  changed  to  '  If  the  Church  of 
England  shall  accept  this  judgment  it  would  forfeit  its  authority  as  a 
divine  teacher.'  This  amendment  was  accepted  because  it  did  not 
say  whether  the  Church  of  England  had  or  had  not  de  facto  accepted 
the  judgment.  Hope  said : — '  I  suppose  we  are  all  agreed  that  if 
the  Church  of  England  does  not  undo  this  we  must  join  the  Church 
of  Rome.'  This  made  an  outcry;  and  I  think  it  was  then  that 
Keble  said  :  —  'If  the  Church  of  England  were  to  fail,  it  should  be 
found  in  my  parish.'  "  ^ 

The  Declaration  to  which  Cardinal  Manning  refers  was, 
of  course,  a  strong  protest  against  the  judgment.  It  con- 
sisted of  nine  clauses,  of  which  the  fifth,  sixth,  and  seventh 
were  as  follows  : — 

"5.  That,  inasmuch  as  the  faith  is  one,  and  rests  upon  one  principle 
of  authority,  the  conscious,  deliberate,  and  wilful  abandonment  of 
the  essential  meaning  of  an  article  of  the  Creed  destroys  the  Divine 
foundation  upon  which  alone  the  entire  faith  is  propounded  by  the 
Church. 

"  6.  That  any  portion  of  the  Church  which  does  so  abandon  the 
essential  meaning  of  an  article,  forfeits,  not  only  the  Catholic 
doctrine  in  that  article,  but  also  the  office  and  authority  to  witness 
and  teach  as  a  member  of  the  Universal  Church. 

"  7.  That  by  such  conscious,  wilful,  and  deliberate  act  such 
portion  of  the  Church  becomes  formally  separated  from  the  Catholic 
body,  and  can  no  longer  assure  to  its  members  the  grace  of  the 
Sacraments  and  the  remission  of  sins."  ^ 

Those  who  signed  this  Declaration  had  not  long  to  wait 
before  they  discovered  that  the  Church  of  England  tacitly 
accepted  a  judgment  which,  according  to  the  Declaration, 

^  Life  of  Cardmal  Manning,  vol.  i.  p.  528. 

^  Ibid,  p.  532.     Life  of  Dr.  Ptisey,  vol.  iii.  pp.  240,  24I. 


PUSEY    WISHKS    TO    PROSECUTE    GORHAM  299 

"  formally  separated  her  from  the  Catholic  body,"  and  made 
her  no  longer  able  "to  assure  to  its  members  the  grace  of 
the  Sacraments  and  the  remission  of  sins."  Of  course  there 
were  protests  against  the  judgment  in  abundance,  but,  in 
her  official  character,  who  can  doubt  that  the  Church  of 
England  has  practically  accepted  the  Gorham  judgment  ? 
Has  any  Bishop  since  its  delivery  dared  to  refuse  institution 
to  a  clergyman  on  the  ground  that  he  held  Mr.  Gorham's 
views  as  to  Baptismal  Regeneration  ?  To  be  consistent, 
every  one  of  the  fourteen  gentlemen  who  signed  the  Declara- 
tion ought,  after  a  reasonable  interval,  to  have  seceded  to 
Rome.  Six  of  the  number  certainly  saw  the  inconsistency 
of  their  position,  after  signing  such  a  document,  in  remain- 
ing in  the  Church  of  England  for  any  lengthy  period,  and 
therefore  they  seceded  to  the  Church  of  Rome.  Those  who 
seceded  were.  Archdeacon  Manning,  Archdeacon  Robert  J. 
Wilberforce,  the  Rev.  W.  Dodsworth,  the  Rev.  Henry  Wil- 
liam Wilberforce,  Mr.  Edward  Badeley,  and  Mr.  James  Hope 
(afterwards  Hope-Scott).  Those  who  signed,  but  remained 
in  the  Church  of  England,  were.  Archdeacon  Thomas  Thorp, 
Dr.  Pusey,  Dr.  Mill,  the  Rev.  John  Keble,  the  Rev.  William 
J.  E.  Bennett,  Mr.  John  C.  Talbot,  Mr.  Richard  Cavendish, 
and  the  Rev.  (afterwards  Archdeacon)  George  Anthony 
Denison. 

There  had  been  a  steady  stream  of  secessions  to  Rome 
from  the  ranks  of  the  Puseyites  ever  since  1841,  but  after 
the  delivery  of  the  Gorham  judgment  the  stream  became 
for  a  time  something  like  a  flood.  A  list  of  the  names  of  the 
seceders  may  be  read  in  Browne's  A?tnals  of  the  Tractarian 
Movement,  and  in  Gorman's  Converts  to  Rome. 

Of  course,  before  the  delivery  of  the  judgment,  there  had 
been  many  anxious  discussions  amongst  the  Puseyites  as  to 
what  they  should  do  when  it  was  delivered.  One  proposal 
found  great  favour,  and  was  warmly  welcomed  by  Pusey 
and  Keble.  It  was  nothing  less  than  to  prosecute  Mr.  Gor- 
ham for  heresy  !  On  February  19,  1850,  Keble  wrote  to 
Pusey  : — "  I  still  find  myself  driven  back  to  the  notion  of 
prosecuting  him  [Gorhd.m']  /or  heresy  ;  which,  however,  I  fear 
is  not  practical,  as  you  say  no  more  of  it,  and  Coleridge 


30O  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

does  not  answer  my  questions  about  it."  ^  Canon  Liddon 
tells  us  that  : — "  Pusey  acquiesced  in  Keble's  proposal  for  a 
prosecution  of  Mr.  Gorham  for  heresy,  and  suggested  this 
course  to  the  Bishop."  ^  On  February  23,  1850,  Keble  again 
wrote  to  Pusey  on  the  subject  : — "  I  am  ashamed  to  say 
nothing  has  been  done  yet  about  the  prosecution  for  heresy. 
I  will  try  and  write  to  Badeley  by  next  post.  I  did  not 
know  till  last  night  that  you  consented  to  that  step."  ^  No 
member  of  the  Church  Association  has  ever  been  more 
anxious  to  prosecute  law-breakers  than  Pusey  and  Keble 
were,  at  this  time,  to  prosecute  the  Evangelical  Mr.  Gorham. 
But,  alas  for  their  hopes !  "  Mr.  Badeley,"  says  Canon 
Liddon,  "  thought  it  impossible  at  the  time  to  prosecute 
Mr.  Gorham  for  heresy."^  No  doubt,  if  it  had  been  pos- 
sible, poor  Mr.  Gorham  would  have  been  prosecuted,  and 
the  Evangelicals,  as  a  consequence,  would  have  been  ban- 
ished from  the  Church  of  England.  Had  such  a  result 
followed  such  a  prosecution,  we  should  never  have  heard 
one  word  from  modern  Ritualists  about  the  supposed 
wickedness  of  ecclesiastical  prosecutions. 

And  what  effect  had  the  Gorham  judgment  on  the  Bishop 
of  Exeter  ?  The  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council  did 
not  order  him  to  institute  Mr.  Gorham,  or,  possibly,  he 
might  have  been  sent  to  prison  for  contempt.  It  remitted 
the  case  to  the  Court  of  Arches,  and  the  Dean  of  Arches, 
acting  for  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  instituted  Mr. 
Gorham  to  the  Rectory  of  Brampford  Speke,  notwithstand- 
ing the  opposition  of  the  Bishop  of  Exeter.  It  was  a  sore 
point  with  the  Bishop  that  the  Dean  should  act,  in  this 
capacity,  as  the  representative  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury. So,  before  the  actual  institution  took  place.  Dr. 
Phillpotts  wrote,  and  published  as  a  pamphlet,  a  not  very 
respectful  Letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury ^  concluding 
with  the  following  strong  protest : — 

"  I  have  one  most  painful  duty  to  perform.  I  have  to  protest 
not  only  against  the  judgment  pronounced  in  tlie  recent  cause,  but 
also  against  the  regular  consequences  of  that  judgment.     I  have  to 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  iii.  p.  223.  ^  Ibid.  p.  223. 

'  Jbid.  p.  226.  ■*  Ibid.  p.  227. 


AN    ARCHBISHOP    EXCOMMUNICATED  301 

protest  against  your  Grace's  doing  what  you  will  be  speedily  called 
to  do,  either  in  person,  or  by  some  other  exercising  your  authority. 
I  have  to  protest,  and  I  do  hereby  solemnly  protest,  before  the 
Church  of  England,  before  the  Holy  Catholic  Church,  before  Him 
who  is  its  Divine  Head,  against  your  giving  mission  to  exercise  cure 
of  souls,  within  my  diocese,  to  a  clergyman  who  proclaims  him- 
self to  hold  the  heresies  which  Mr.  Gorham  holds.  I  protest  that 
any  one  who  gives  mission  to  him  till  he  retract,  is  a  favourer  and 
supporter  of  these  heresies.  I  protest,  in  conclusion,  that  I  cannot 
without  sin — and  by  God's  grace  I  will  not — hold  communion  with 
him,  be  he  who  he  may,  who  shall  so  abuse  the  high  commission 
which  he  bears."  ^ 

The  Rev.  William  Goode  replied  to  the  Bishop  of  Exeter 
in  a  forcible  and  well-written  pamphlet  of  107  pages.  On 
the  passage  from  that  prelate's  letter  which  I  have  just  cited, 
Mr.  Goode  remarked  : — 

**  My  Lord,  if  by  these  words  you  mean  that  you  are  about  to 
retire  to  a  more  suitable  communion  than  the  Church  of  England, 
be  it  so.  You  will  not  ask  us  to  lament  your  departure.  Nor  shall 
you  hear  from  me  words  of  exultation  or  insult.  Or  if  you  mean 
that  you  will  withdraw  from  the  Primate  the  light  of  your  presence, 
and  the  blessing  of  your  communion  and  'affectionate  friendship,' 
why  then,  my  Lord, — if  you  have  really  made  up  your  mind — so  it 
must  be.  And  I  will  only  hope  that  his  Grace  may  be  enabled  to 
bear  the  deprivation  with  equanimity. 

"  But  if  you  mean,  what  your  words  appear  to  mean,  that,  re- 
taining your  position  in  this  Church  and  country  as  the  Bishop  of 
Exeter,  you  will  set  at  defiance  your  Primate  and  your  Sovereign ; 
that  you  will  place  yourself  in  a  state  of  open  rebellion  against  the 
laws  of  your  country;  then,  my  Lord,  I  leave  you,  without  fear,  to 
reap  the  due  reward  of  broken  vows  and  violated  oaths ;  feeling  well 
assured  that  the  majesty  of  the  law  will  obtain  as  easy  a  triumph 
over  Devonshire  and  Cornish  rebels  now,  as  it  did  three  centuries 
ago."  2 

Any  one  reading  the  pamphlet  of  the  Bishop  of  Exeter 
must  admit  that  he  had  the  courage  of  his  convictions.  It 
was,  indeed,  a  daring  thing  to  do — to  practically  excom- 

^  A  Letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  By  the  Bishop  of  Exeter,  p.  90. 
London  :  John  Murray.     1850. 

^  A  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Exeter.  By  William  Goode,  M.A.,  p.  97,  3rd 
edition.     London  :  Hatchard  &  Son.     1850. 


302  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

municate  his  own  Primate.  But  he  went  further,  and  tried 
to  blacken  Mr.  Gorham's  theological  character  in  the  eyes 
of  his  new  parishioners  at  Brampford  Speke,  by  a  published 
letter  to  the  Churchwardens  of  that  parish.  In  this  docu- 
ment Dr.  Phillpotts  most  unjustly  affirmed  that  "truths  on 
which  the  whole  teaching  of  the  Church  rests"  "were 
directly  contradicted  by  your  new  Vicar  in  his  examination 
before  me,  his  Bishop."  ^  The  Churchwardens  were  assured 
that : — "You  have  already  too  strong  reason  to  apprehend 
that  your  new  Vicar  may  endeavour  to  spread  the  poison  of 
heresy  among  his  people";^  and  that  Mr.  Gorham  was 
"one  who  himself  believes  not  the  saving  truths  which  he 
has  undertaken  to  teach."  ^  The  Churchwardens  were 
exhorted  to  act  as  spies  on  their  Vicar's  preaching,  and  if 
he  taught  from  the  pulpit  anything  contrary  to  the  Bishop's 
view  of  Baptismal  Regeneration,  they  were  to  make  a  note 
of  his  words,  and  send  them  to  the  Archdeacon,  in  order  that 
they  might  be  dealt  with  by  the  Bishop.  In  that  case  the 
Bishop  promised  to  prosecute  Mr.  Gorham  for  heresy. 

Now  there  can  be  no  question  that  a  letter  like  this  was 
well  calculated  to  stir  up  the  parishioners  of  Brampford 
Speke  against  their  new  Vicar.  It  certainly  was  not  a  case 
of  trying  to  pour  oil  on  the  troubled  waters.  And,  more- 
over, it  was  in  defiance  of  the  law.  The  next  step  taken  by 
the  Bishop  was  to  convoke  what  he  termed  a  "  Synod  "  of 
his  clergy,  mainly  to  consider  this  question  of  Baptismal 
Regeneration.  His  lordship,  however,  did  not  invite  all  oi 
the  clergy  to  take  part  in  it ;  had  he  done  so  the  proceedings 
vi^ould  not  have  passed  off  as  smoothly  as  he  desired.  So 
he  invited  the  clergy  of  every  Rural  Deanery  to  elect  two 
only  of  their  Deanery  as  their  representatives  ;  and  to  these 
were  added  the  Dean  of  Exeter  and  the  Greater  Chapter, 
the  Bishop's  Chaplains,  and  the  officials  of  the  Archdeacons.* 
The  laity  were  left  out  altogether.  Had  they  been  admitted 
the  Bishop  knew  very  well  that  he  would  have  had  a  very 
disagreeable  time  in  the  Synod.     The  Synod  met  on  June 

^  A  Letter  to  the  Churchwardens  of  Biampford  Speke.      By  the  Bishop  of 
Exeter,  p.  lo,  2nd  edition.     London  :  John  Murray.     1850. 
2  Ibid.  p.  14.  3  Ibid.  p.  15. 

*  Acts  of  the  Synod  of  Exeter, '^.  i.     London:  John  Murray.     1851. 


TWO    BOOKS    ON    THE    GORHAM    CASE  303 

25,  1 85 1,  and  the  proceedings  lasted  three  days  ;  but  a  por- 
tion of  the  second  day  only  was  devoted  to  the  real  object  for 
which  it  was  convened.  Now  there  was  not  a  man  at  that 
Synod  who  did  not  know  very  well  that,  were  he  to  get  up 
and  speak  against  the  Declaration  on  Baptism  submitted  to 
it,  he  would  be  a  marked  man  by  the  Bishop  from  that  day 
out.  The  names  of  those  who  were  present  were  not  printed 
in  the  official  report  of  the  proceedings  subsequently  issued 
"  By  Authority,"  and  therefore  I  cannot  tell  whether  there 
were  any  Evangelical  clergymen  in  the  Synod.  If  they 
were  there  they  ought  to  have  spoken  out,  and  voted  against 
the  Declaration,  which  was  so  strongly  on  the  side  of  the 
Bishop's  views  as  to  Baptismal  Regeneration  that,  when  it 
was  declared  carried  unanimously,  the  Bishop  exclaimed  : — 
"Thank  God  for  this  :  let  His  Holy  Name  be  praised."  ^ 

One  result  of  the  Gorham  Case  was  the  publication  of 
two  important  books  on  Baptismal  Regeneration.  One, 
published  in  1862,  was  entitled,  A  Review  of  the  Baptismal 
Co?itroversy,  and  was  written  by  the  Rev.  J.  B.  Mozley,  a 
High  Churchman,  and  subsequently  Regius  Professor  of 
Divinity  in  the  University  of  Oxford.  The  object  of  this 
work  is  thus  explained  by  its  learned  author  in  his  preface: 
— "  I  have,  however,  in  the  present  treatise,  confined  myself 
to  two  positions  :  one,  that  the  doctrine  of  the  regeneration 
of  all  infants  in  Baptism  is  not  an  article  of  the  faith  ;  the 
other,  that  the  formularies  of  our  Church  do  not  impose  it." 
The  other  work,  published  in  1849,  while  the  Gorham  Case 
was  still  undecided,  was  written  by  the  Rev.  William  Goode, 
and  bore  the  title  of  The  Doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England 
as  to  the  Effects  of  Baptism.  I  would  strongly  recommend 
both  of  these  valuable  and  important  works  to  the  Evan- 
gelical clergy  and  laity,  and  also  to  those  who  wish  to  know 
what  can  be  said  in  support  of  the  Gorham  judgment.  The 
Baptismal  Regeneration  controversy  is  not  studied  now  as 
much  as  in  former  years,  and  yet  it  is  needed  now  more 
than  ever.  Its  importance  for  Evangelical  Churchmen 
cannot  be  over-estimated. 

Coming  back  to  the  year  1849  we  find  the  Bishop  of 

^  Acts  of  the  Synod  of  Exiter,  p.  57. 


304  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Oxford  endeavouring  to  exercise  Episcopal  discipline  over 
one  of  his  Romanising  clergymen — the  Rev.  T.  W.  Allies, 
Rector  of  Launton,  Oxon.  This  case  shows  how  audacious 
some  of  the  clergy  had  already  become  in  their  march  to 
Rome.  Several  years  before  this,  while  officiating  for  the 
Rev.  W.  J.  Bennett,  that  gentleman  had  given  Mr.  Allies  a 
copy  of  the  Roman  Missal,  and  ever  since  his  Romeward 
sympathies  had  developed  rapidly.  In  1840  Mr.  Allies  was 
appointed  Chaplain  to  Dr.  Blomfield,  Bishop  of  London, 
an  office  which  he  held  until  June  1842.  Soon  after  he 
became  Rector  of  Launton.  We  learn  from  Mr.  Allies' 
autobiography  that  early  in  1844  he  had  come  to  the  con- 
clusion "that  post-Baptismal  sin  required  Sacramental  Con- 
fession and  Absolution."  ^  He  fitted  up  his  Church  with 
open  oak  pews.  It  was  reopened  on  September  i,  1844. 
^^  Before  that  time,"  says  Mr.  Allies,  ^^  all  my  trust  in  Angli- 
canism was  gone r  ^  And  yet  he  remained  officiating  within 
the  Anglican  Church,  as  one  of  her  clergy,  for  seven  years 
and  a  half  afterwards  !  How  he  could  do  it  with  a  comfort- 
able conscience  is  indeed  a  mystery.  On  February  12,  1845, 
he  wrote  in  his  diary : — "  Since  my  last  birthday  one  very 
important  change  of  view  has  developed  itself — a  secret 
and  yet  undefined  dread  that  we  are  in  a  state  of  schism."  ^ 
He  wrote  a  book  in  1846  entitled  The  Church  of  England 
Cleared  from  the  Charge  of  Schis})i,  of  which  he  brought  out 
a  second  edition  in  February,  1848  ;  and  this  is  how  he 
describes  its  publication: — "  I  had  become,  both  practically 
and  theoretically,  more  and  more  disgusted  with  the  Angli- 
can Church,  more  and  more  struck  with  what  I  saw  of  the 
action  and  conduct  of  the  Catholic  Church  abroad.  And 
so  it  came  to  pass,  that  I  was  publishing  the  second  edition 
of  a  book,  written  in  the  utmost  good  faith,  with  daily 
prayers  for  enlightenment,  in  ostensible  defence  of  a  com- 
munion which  I  thoroughly  hated."  *  It  must  have  required  an 
immense  quantity  of  Jesuitical  casuistry  to  have  enabled 
him  to  continue  ministering  for  two  and  a  half  years  more 

^  A  Life's  Decision.     By  T.  W.  Allies,  p.  50,  2nd  edition.     London  :  Burns 
and  Oates.     1894. 

^  Ibid.  p.  51.  3  /^/^_  p_  ^2. 

*  Ibid.  p.  115. 


"A    SACRED    DEBT    TO    THE    ROMAN    CHURCH"       305 

in  a  communion  which  he  "thoroughly  hated."  What 
part  had  any  sense  of  truth  and  honour  in  such  conduct  ? 
Early  in  1849  Mr.  Allies  pubhshed  his  Journal  in  France} 
On  February  19th  he  wrote  in  his  diary  : — "  Received  to-day 
the  first  copies  of  my  Journal  in  France.  I  went  into  the 
garden  and  read  the  whole  conclusion.  The  publishing 
this  book  gave  me  great  gratification.  It  so  exactly  sets  forth 
my  mind  ;  it  pays  a  debt  which  I  seemed  to  owe  to  the  Roman 
Church  ;  "  and  again,  on  the  following  day,  he  wrote  in  the 
same  diary,  with  reference  to  this  book  : — "  I  seem  to  have 
discharged  a  sacred  debt  to  the  Roman  Church."  ^  The 
Rev.  Charles  Marriott,  writing  from  Oriel  College,  on  Easter 
Monday  1849,  to  thank  Allies  for  a  copy  of  the  book,  said 
that,  in  what  he  had  written  about  Invocation  of  Saints, 
"  so  far  you  have  exercised  a  laudable  subtlety."  ^  There 
can  be  no  doubt  about  the  "  subtlety,"  but  I  do  not  believe 
that  it  was  "  laudable."  Almost  everything  in  Romanism 
was  held  up  by  Mr.  Allies  to  admiration  in  this  book.  The 
following  extracts  from  it  will  give  some  idea  of  how  far 
its  author  had  gone  towards  Rome  : — 

"Most  intimately  connected  with  the  dogma  of  the  Incar- 
nation, and  its  symbol,  the  Real  Presence,  is  that  of  the  Inter- 
cession of  all  Saints,  especially  of  the  Blessed  Mother  of  God ;  nay, 
this  may  be  said  to  be  the  continuation  and  carrying  out  of  the  Real 
Presence,  so  that  wherever  that  is  truly  and  heartfuUy  believed,  this 
will  be,  within  due  bounds,  cherished  and  practised."^ 

"And  may  not  we  ask  you,  who  dwell  in  sight  of  the  Eternal 
Throne,  but  who  once,  like  ourselves,  bore  the  burden  and  heat  of  the 
day  in  this  earthly  wilderness,  may  we  not  ask  you  to  turn  your 
regards  on  us,  to  intercede  for  us  before  Him,  whose  members  ye 
are  in  glory,  and  we  in  trial  ?  "  ^ 

"  Christ  is  present  in  His  Church,  for  the  Priest  in  the  tribunal 
of  penitence  is  as  God  himself."  ^ 

"  Among  minor  things,  which  yet  we  have  suffered  loss  and  harm 


^  Journal  in  France  in  1845  and  1848.     By  Thomas  William  Allies,  M.A,, 
Rector  of  Launton,  pp.  xii.  388. 
"  A  Life's  Decision,  p.  125. 
3  Ibid.  p.  148. 

*  Allies'  Journal  in  France,  p.  334. 
»  /did.  p.  335-  '  ^^id'  P-  338. 

U 


306  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

in  giving  up,  may  be  reckoned  the  custom  of  crossing  with  Holy 
Water  on  entering  a  Church."  ^ 

"  A  still  more  to  be  regretted  omission  is  that  of  the  Crucifix, 
which  might,  with  much  edification,  appear  prominently  at  least  in 
one  part  of  the  Church,  over  the  Rood  Screen  or  over  the  altar."  ^ 

"  If  the  Anglo-German  race  be  ever  restored  to  the  communion 
of  the  Latin  Church,  as  I  fervently  pray  that  mercy  may  be  reserved 
for  them  by  God."  » 

The  Bishop  of  Oxford  read  the  book  soon  after  its 
publication,  and  gave  his  opinion  of  it  in  the  most  em- 
phatic terms  on  March  8th.  "It  is,"  he  declared,  "the 
most  undisguised,  unblushing  preference  for  Rome  I 
almost  ever  read."  ^  Nine  days  later  he  wrote  to  the 
author  of  the  book,  calling  his  attention  to  the  variance 
which  existed  "between  its  language  and  the  dogmatic 
teachings  of  the  Church  of  England  ;  "  and  adding  that 
no  particular  extracts  could  "  fully  exhibit  this  contra- 
diction, because  the  general  tone  "  of  the  book  was  "  more 
at  variance  with  the  teaching  of  our  Church  "  than  any 
particular  extracts.  His  language  concerning  the  Mass 
contradicted  the  explicit  teaching  of  Article  XXVIII.  The 
tone  of  the  book  towards  the  Church  of  England  was 
"  deprecating,  and  even  insulting,"  while  it  contained 
"  unbounded  eulogies  of  the  Papal  system."  The  Bishop 
enclosed  a  set  of  extracts  from  the  book,  and  called  on 
Mr.  Allies  for  an  explanation  or  an  unqualified  retractation.^ 
The  author's  reply  was  not  considered  satisfactory,  and 
therefore  the  Bishop  wrote  to  him  again  on  March  24th, 
pointing  out  that  he  had  not  replied  to  his  chief  objections 
against  the  book  : — "  The  part  of  my  communication," 
wrote  Dr.  Wilberforce,  "which  needed  the  most  direct 
reply  you  have  left  almost  untouched,  under  the  allegation 
that  my  letter  closes  with  a  threat.  I  think  that  if  you 
look  again  at  it,  you  will  perceive  that  it  contains  nothing 
but  a  declaration  that  if  you  cannot  show  that  your  state- 
ments do  not  contradict  the  Articles,  and  will  not  retract 
them,  I  shall  appeal  to  your  own  conscience  as  to  whether 

^  A\\\e%'  Joiij-nal  in  France,  p.  340.  ^  Ibid.  p.  340. 

» IbiJ.  p.  344. 

*  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  ii.  p.  17.  ^  Ibid.  pp.  17,  18. 


THE    CASE    OF    MR.    ALLIES  307 

it  is  honest  to  maintain  your  position  as  a  paid  teacher  of 
doctrines  you  formally  deny."  ^ 

The  case  of  Mr.  Allies  worried  the  Bishop  not  a  little. 
"  I  have  great  trouble  with  Mr.  Allies,"  he  wrote  to  his 
sister-in-law ;  "  he  has  given  me  most  evasive  answers  to 
the  questions  I  have  been  obhged  to  put  to  him.  He 
wishes  to  make  out  that  he  may  hold  all  Roman  doctrine, 
except  the  Pope's  Supremacy,  and  remain  with  us.  I  am 
now  taking  an  opinion  whether  his  words  make  his  meajting 
plain  enough  for  me  to  proceed  in  the  Courts  against 
him."  2  The  legal  opinion  referred  to  in  this  letter  was 
given  to  the  Bishop  a  week  later  by  the  well-known 
ecclesiastical  lawyer,  Dr.  Lushington.  He  said  that  he 
was  satisfied  that  "  a  prosecution  would  be  attended  with 
success."  There  were  evils  in  such  prosecutions,  but  it 
would  in  this  case  be  a  greater  evil  not  to  prosecute.  The 
Bishop  decided  to  send  the  case  to  the  Court  of  Arches, 
but  at  the  last  moment  Baron  Alderson  persuaded  him 
not  to  do  so,  on  the  ground  that  a  lawsuit  would  tend 
to  a  schism  in  the  Church,  while  the  tendencies  of  the 
Romanisers  would  "  die  out  if  judiciously  left  alone  " — 
an  opinion  which  the  results  have  not  justified.  The 
Baron's  appeal  was  backed  up  by  a  letter  from  his  friend, 
Mr.  Allies,  addressed  to  the  Bishop,  in  which  he  expressed 
regret  that  anything  in  his  book  "  should  appear  to  my 
Diocesan  to  be  contrary  to  the  Articles  of  the  Church  of 
England,  or  calculated  to  depreciate  that  Church  in  com- 
parison with  the  Church  of  Rome  ;  and  I  undertake  not  to 
publish  a  second  edition  of  the  work.  I  declare  my  ad- 
herence to  the  Articles  in  their  plain,  literal,  and  gram- 
matical sense,  and  will  not  preach  or  teach  anything 
contrary  to  such  Articles  in  their  plain,  literal,  and  gram- 
matical sense."  ^  This,  be  it  observed,  was  not  an  acknow- 
ledgment that  he  had  written  anything  in  his  book 
contrary  to  the  Articles,  but  that  he  was  sorry  the 
Bishop  should  think  so.  It  was  very  wrong  of  Bishop 
Wilberforce  to  yield  to  the  advice  of  Allies'  friends  in 
withdrawing  the  prosecution,  and  it  was  not  long  before 

1  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  p,  19. 

^  Ibid.  p.  20.  '  Ibid.  p.  26. 


308  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

he  had  cause  to  regret  his  decision.  In  his  old  age, 
writing  as  a  Roman  Catholic,  Mr.  Allies  frankly  acknow- 
ledges : — "  Simply  taking  the  passages  in  my  Journal 
quoted  by  the  Bishop,  they  certainly  appear  to  me  irrecon- 
cilable with  the  letter,  and  still  more  with  the  spirit,  of 
the  Anglican  Articles ;  "  ^  and,  he  adds,  that  he  has  "  no 
doubt  whatever  that  he  [the  Bishop]  would  have  got  a 
judgment  against  me."  ^ 

On  July  26,  1849,  Mr.  Allies,  accompanied  by  a  friend, 
started  on  a  journey  to  Rome.  Writing  as  a  Roman 
Catholic  he  says  : — "  It  was  quite  necessary  for  my  health 
and  spirits  to  seek  for  a  time  a  total  change  of  scene,  and  I 
could  think  of  nothing  so  attractive  as  a  visit  to  Rome,  and 
especially  to  the  Pope.  ...  I  feh  that  I  had  not  a  shred  to 
love  in  Anglicanism,  yet  all  the  while  the  speculative  diffi- 
culty on  the  side  of  the  Roman  Supremacy  remained."* 
Of  course  while  at  Rome  he  had  an  interview  with  Pope 
Pius  IX.,  who  seems  to  have  had  a  great  admiration  for  Dr. 
Pusey.  His  opinion  of  that  divine,  as  given  by  Mr.  Allies 
in  his  report  of  this  interview,  is  very  interesting  : — 

"  Then  he  asked  after  Dr.  Pusey.  '  He  has  done,^  said  the  Pope, 
^  much  good;  he  has  opened  the  door;  he  has  set  before  his 
countrymen  the  principle  of  authority,  which  is  the  first  thing  in 
religion  ;  he  has  prepared  the  way  for  Catholicisju.^  "* 

So  much  for  Dr.  Pusey.  And  this  is  what  Mr.  Allies 
told  the  Pope  about  himself,  and  some  of  his  Puseyite 
friends  he  had  left  behind  in  England  : — "  I  consider  it  a 
blessing  to  have  the  opportunity  of  expressing  personally  to 
your  Holiness,  that  some  ecclesiastics  at  least  amongst  us — 
I  may  say,  several — deeply  feel  how  great  a  calamity  it  has 
been  to  England,  and  to  the  whole  British  realm,  that  she  has 
been  separated  froin  the  Holy  See.  They  ardently  desire  her 
reunion  with  it."  Mr.  Allies  adds  that  the  Pope  "  expressed 
his  joy  at  this.  I  asked  if  he  would  give  us  his  blessing, 
'That  I  will  do  with  all  my  heart,'  he  replied,  'and  I  will 
pray  for  you,  and  for  your  friends,  and  for  all  England.' 
He  also,  at  our  request,  blessed  two  Crucifixes  which  I  held 

'^  A  Life's  Decision,  p.  197.  "^  Ibid.  p.  £98. 

^  Ibid.  p.  199.  *  Ibid.  p.  203. 


UNPLEASANT    QUESTIONS    FOR    PUSEY  309 

in  my  hand,  and  also  those  in  Wynne  s  ;  he  seemed  merely 
to  touch  them.  We  then  knelt,  and  he  pronounced  the 
blessing."  ^  And  all  the  while  this  man,  thus  kneeling  before 
the  Pope,  humbly  seeking  his  blessing  for  himself  and  his 
crucifixes,  was  professedly  a  clergyman  of  the  Church  of 
England,  receiving  her  pay,  and  bound  to  her  by  oaths  of 
allegiance  !  Truly  there  are  many  crooked  things  in  the 
History  of  the  Romeward  Movement  !  "  I  then,"  writes 
Mr.  Allies,  "returned  by  sea  to  Marseilles,  leaving  Wynne 
at  Genoa,  and  on  Thursday,  September  13th,  was  again  in 
England,  and  carrying  about  with  vie  the  Popes  present  as  a 
safeguard  against  all  evil"  ^  He  must,  indeed,  have  fallen 
deep  into  the  mire  of  superstition  ere  he  could  have  believed 
that  the  Pope's  present  would  defend  him  "  against  all 
evil !  "  A  year  later,  on  September  8,  1850,  Allies  announced 
his  resignation  of  the  living  of  Launton,  and  the  day  after 
he  was  received  into  the  Church  of  Rome  by  Newman. 

A  few  weeks  before  his  secession,  Mr.  Allies  joined  two 
of  his  friends,  the  Revs.  W.  Dodsworth  and  W.  Maskell,  in 
sending  to  Dr.  Pusey  a  joint  letter  on  the  subject  of  Auri- 
cular Confession,  which  greatly  disturbed  the  latter  gentle- 
man : — 

"We  wish,"  these  gentlemen  wrote  to  Pusey,  "to  put  you  a 
question  on  a  point  nearly  concerning  our  own  peace  of  mind,  and 
that  of  others.  It  is  this — What  authority  is  there  for  supposing 
that  the  acts  of  a  priest  are  valid  who  hears  Confessions,  and  gives 
Absolution,  in  mere  virtue  of  his  orders,  without  ordinary  or  delegated 
jurisdiction  from  his  Bishop  ?  We  believe  it  to  be  the  undisputed  law 
of  the  Church  that  acts  flowing  from  Order,  though  done  wrongly 
and  illicitly,  are  yet,  when  done,  valid ;  the  reason  of  which  is,  that 
the  power  of  Order,  being  given  by  consecration  and  indelible,  can- 
not be  taken  away  :  but  that  acts  flowing  from  Jurisdiction,  if  done 
upon  those  over  whom  the  doer  has  no  Jurisdiction,  are  absolutely 
invalid  and  null."  ^ 

"  But  what  we  wish  to  know  is,  whether  there  be  any  authority 
for  considering  valid  the  Absolution  of  a  priest,  who  has  neither 


^  A  Life's  Decision,  p.  203.  ^  Ibid.  p.  206. 

'  A  Letter  to  the  Rev.  Dr.  Ptisey  On  His  Practice  of  Receiving  Persons  in 
Auricular  Confessions,  By  William  Maskell,  M.A.,  pp.  8,  9.  London  :  William 
Pickering.     1850. 


310  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

received  such  ordinary  Jurisdiction  in  the  cure  of  souls,  nor  such 
delegated  Jurisdiction,  or,  again,  who,  having  the  cure  of  souls,  ab- 
solves not  only  his  own  parishioners,  but  others  also,  without  licence 
from  their  own  parish  priest  or  Bishop."  ^ 

"  It  would  certainly  follow  from  all  this,  as  it  seems  to  us,  that  the 
authority  which  for  some  time  past  has  been  exercised  by  some  among 
us,  and  especially  by  yourself,  not  only  in  our  own  dioceses,  but  in 
other  dioceses — often  without  the  knowledge,  and  probably  (were  it 
known)  it  would  be  against  the  consent,  of  both  the  parish  priest  and 
Bishop — has  not  been  based  upon  true  and  sufificient  foundation : 
nay  more,  has  been  (however  ignorantly)  in  opposition  to  Catholic 
rules  from  the  first  ages  to  the  present  time.  And  further — a  point 
to  which  we  allude  with  reluctance  and  sorrow — it  would  follow  like- 
wise that  the  vast  majority  of  those  persons,  to  whom  you  and  others 
have  given  Absolution  in  this  manner,  are  still,  so  far  as  the  effect 
of  any  such  Absolutions  is  concerned,  under  the  chain  of  their  sins, 
because  they  have  not  made  Confession  to  priests  who  had  duly 
received  power  to  absolve  them.  Hence,  we  cannot  suppose  that 
you  will  be  surprised  that  we  should  earnestly  desire  from  you  ah 
elucidation  of  this  matter."  2 

This  letter  seems  to  have  disturbed  Pusey  very  much. 
He  complained  of  its  tone,  and  especially  of  its  refer- 
ence to  his  own  practice — a  very  delicate  point — and  he 
asked  the  writers  to  alter,  before  publication,  the  wording 
of  their  letter.  This,  however,  they  declined  to  do,  and 
pressed  for  an  answer.  Of  course  they  had  put  to  him  a 
very  difficult  and  awkward  question.  He  had  been  wander- 
ing about  the  country — especially  in  Devonshire — hearing 
Confessions  on  the  sly,  as  Mr.  Maskell  pointed  out  to  him 
later  on.  If  he  could  have  produced  Episcopal  leave  for 
hearing  these  Confessions,  and  also  the  leave  of  the  In- 
cumbents of  those  parishes  where  he  had  heard  them,  he 
would  have  had  an  answer  at  hand,  which  must  have  satis- 
fied Messrs.  Maskell,  Allies,  and  Dodsworth,  so  far,  at  least, 
as  his  own  practice  was  concerned.  But  as  he  could  not 
do  this,  he  wrote  and  published  a  large  volume  of  312 
pages,   the   title   of    which  really  was   his   answer   to   the 

^  Maskell's  Letter  to  the  Rev.  Dr.  Pusey  On  His  Practice  of  Receiving  Persons 
in  Auricular  Confessions,  p.  lO. 
*  Ibid.  pp.  13,  14. 


PUSEY'S    CONFESSIONAL    PRACTICE    EXPOSED  31 1 

questions  put  to  him  :  The  Church  of  England  Leaves 
Her  Children  Free  to  Whom  to  Open  Their  Griefs.  Ever 
since  then  the  Ritualistic  Father  Confessors  seem  to  have 
acted  on  the  principle  laid  down  by  Dr.  Pusey  in  justifica- 
tion of  his  own  practice.  The  controversy  over  Jurisdiction 
has  very  little,  if  any,  practical  interest  to  Protestant 
Churchmen,  who  never  need  to  practise  Auricular  Con- 
fession to  human  priests,  having  a  much  better  Confessional 
to  resort  to,  in  which  the  Great  High  Priest  sits  to  hear 
Confessions  and  give  His  all-satisfying  Absolution ;  but 
this  correspondence  is  important  to  them  for  this  reason. 
The  controversy  led  to  an  exposure  of  Pusey's  practice, 
which  was  most  useful  in  opening  the  eyes  of  Englishmen 
to  the  thoroughly  Romish  character  of  Auricular  Con- 
fession, as  conducted  by  the  leader  of  the  Puseyites.  I 
quote  these  exposures  with  confidence,  since  Pusey  was 
unable  to  contradict  any  one  of  the  charges  brought 
against  him,  excepting  only  that  which  affirmed  that  he 
had  "enjoined"  Confession  on  his  penitents.  I  should 
here  mention  that  Messrs.  Maskell,  Allies,  and  Dods- 
worth  seceded  to  Rome  soon  after  their  united  letter  to 
Pusey.  As  to  Pusey's  denial  of  having  "enjoined"  Auri- 
cular Confession,  Mr.  Maskell  wrote  to  him  : — 

"  In  p.  6  of  your  letter  to  Mr.  Richards,  you  blame  Mr.  Dods- 
worth  for  having  said  in  his  published  letter  to  you,  that  you  have 
'enjoined'  Auricular  Confession;  and  you  say  that  you  could  not 
enjoin  Auricular  Confession.  Suffer  me  to  say,  that,  in  connection 
with  the  other  words  of  the  same  sentence,  Mr.  Dodsworth's  use  of 
the  word  enjoin  was  just  and  reasonable.  He  does  not  use  it  simply, 
and  without  limitation;  he  says  that  you  have  'encouraged,  if  not 
enjoined,'  Auricular  Confession  :  by  which  it  is  evident  that,  in  the 
sense  of  compulsion,  he  knew,  as  well  as  yourself,  you  could  not 
possibly  enjoin  Auricular  Confession.  And  he  knew  also,  as  I 
know,  that  to  say  merely  that  you  have  encouraged  it,  would  fall  as 
far  short  of  what  your  actual  practice  is,  as  the  word  enjoin,  in  the 
sense  of  compelling,  would  exceed  it.  He  knew  that  you  had  done 
more  than  encouraged  Confession  in  very  many  cases ;  that  you  have 
warned  people  of  the  danger  of  deferring  it,  have  insisted  on  it  as 
the  only  remedy,  have  pointed  out  the  inevitable  dangers  of  the 
neglect   of  it,    and    have   promised   the   highest   blessings   in   the 


312  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

observance,  U7itil  you  had  brought  penitents  in  fear  and  trembling 
upon  their  knees  before  you P  ^ 

"To  conclude,  in  hearing  Auricular  Confessions,  in  giving 
Absolution,  and  in  assuring  those  who  come  to  you  that  the  grace 
which  they  so  receive  by  your  ministry  is  Sacramental,  and  effective 
of  the  removal  of  the  guilt  of  mortal  sin — in  thus  speaking  and  thus 
acting,  you  cannot  have  any  other  guide,  or  authority,  or  teacher, 
than  the  [Roman]  Catholic  Church.  To  her  documents,  canons,  and 
decisions,  and  to  the  voice  of  her  theologians  in  their  books  upon 
the  subject,  yoxi  must  and  do  refer.  Whatsoever  you  hold  upon  this 
great  Christian  Sacrament  is  derived  from  that  source,  and  from 
that  source  alone;  and  if  this  be  so,  as  regards  your  theory  of 
Absolution,  much  more  is  it  as  regards  your  practice  in  hearing 
Auricular  Confessions.  I  shall  not  enter  into  this  last  point.  It 
would  give  you  as  well  as  myself  sorrow  to  be  obliged  to  do  so. 
All  that  need  be  said  is  that  the  rules  of  the  Church  of 
Rome,  and  no  other,  are  your  rules."  ^ 

In  the  following  year  Mr.  Dodsworth  published  two  or 
three  more  controversial  pamphlets.  In  one  of  these  he 
said  : — 

"  I  knew,  what  was  also  known  to  hundreds  of  other  persons,  that 
clergymen  of  the  Established  Church  (I  myself  was  one)  were  in 
the  habit  of  doing  what  is  here  described ;  that  is,  of  receiving  Con- 
fessions, both  from  men  and  women,  of  their  whole  lives,  in  details 
as  minute  as  any  that  can  possibly  be  made  to  a  Catholic  Priest ;  of 
enjoining  penance,  and  giving  Priestly  Absolution.  Dr.  Pusey  (I 
mention  it  to  his  honour),  was  one  of  the  foremost  to  commend  the 
restoration  of  this  salutary  practice,  both  by  precept  and  example. 
He  was  the  first  Anglican  clergyman  who  spoke  to  me  of  its  revival 
in  the  Established  Church,  and  I  know  of  many  persons  whom  he 
has  led  into  the  practice.  With  regard  to  what  English  Protestants 
most  object  to — the  minute  details  of  sins  in  Confession — it  is  only 
right  to  say,  so  far  as  I  know,  that  Confession  is  required  to  be  at 
least  quite  as  minute,  where  observed  in  the  Established  Church,  as 
it  is  in  the  Catholic  Church."^ 

The  Revs.  W.  Maskell,  W.  Dodsworth,  and  T.  W.  Allies 
had  been  for  years  the  friends  of  Dr.  Pusey,  and  were 
intimately  acquainted  with  the  inner  working  of  the  Rome- 

^  Maskell's  Letter  to  the  Rev.  Dr.  Pusey  On  His  Practice  of  Receiving  Persons 
in  Auricular  Coifessions,  pp.  17,  18.  "^  Ibid.  p.  50. 

*  A  Few  Comments  on  Dr.  Pusey'' s  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  London.  By 
William  Dodsworth,  M.A.,  pp.  5,  6.     London:  William  Pickering.     1S51. 


"A    WITNESS    IN    FAVOUR    OF    ROME"  313 

ward  Movement  in  the  Church  of  England.  They  testified 
to  that  which  they  knezv,  and  therefore  their  testimony — not 
having  been  since  contradicted  on  anyjmaterial  point — is  of 
great  importance,  as  proving,  beyond  the  possibiHty  of  a 
doubt,  the  thoroughly  Romish  character  of  the  Confessional 
as  worked  by  Dr.  Pusey.  It  was  to  them,  as  it  has  always 
been,  a  great  instrument  of  priestly  power  ;  and  as  we  have 
seen,  it  "  brought  penitents  in  fear  and  trembling  upon 
their  knees  "  before  their  spiritual  lords  and  masters.  Mr. 
Dodsworth  had  been  Perpetual  Curate  of  Christ  Church,  St. 
Pancras,  and  soon  after  his  secession  to  Rome  he  addressed 
a  pubHshed  letter  to  his  late  congregation,  explaining  why 
he  had  left  them.  In  this  document  he  frankly  acknowledged 
the  great  assistance  the  Oxford  Movement  had  already  been 
to  the  Church  of  Rome.  What  would  he  have  said  of  these 
services,  had  he  lived  to  the  year  1900?  Of  "the  Oxford 
Movement  of  1833"  Mr.  Dodsworth  said  : — 

"  I  think  its  tendency  towards  Rome  has  been  very  decisive  and 
very  extensive.  Look  at  the  Church  of  England  as  it  was  fifty  years 
ago,  or  even  thirty.  At  that  time  it  would  have  been  thought  Popish 
to  speak  of  the  Real  Presence ;  the  doctrine  of  the  Eucharistic 
Sacrifice  was  scarcely  known  in  the  teaching  of  the  Church. 
Auricular  Confession,  counsels  of  perfection,  the  Conventual  Life, 
as  well  as  less  important  matters,  such  as  the  use  of  the  Crucifix, 
&c.,  were  all  identified  with  Popery.  But  now  these  doctrines  and 
usages  are  quite  current  amongst  Anglicans.  May  we  not  appeal 
to  the  common-sense  of  men  to  say  whether  these  things  are  not 
a  decisive  approximation  to  Home  ?  Nay,  more,  are  not  Anglicans 
indebted  to  Rome  for  them  ?  .  .  .  And  then,  if  it  be  admitted,  as 
it  must  be,  that  they  enter  vitally  into  the  truth  of  our  holy  religion, 
and  have  a  most  decisive  influence  upon  religious  practice,  must  it 
not  also  be  admitted  that  the  revival  of  these  things  amongst  Angli- 
cans is  so  far  a  tvitness  in  favour  of  Rome  ?  "  ^ 

Mr.  Dodsworth's  exposures  of  Dr.  Pusey's  Confessional 
practices  brought  the  latter  gentleman  into  trouble  with 
his  Diocesan.  But  it  was  not  his  work  as  a  Father  Con- 
fessor only  which  brought  down  on  Pusey  the  censures  of 
Bishop  Wilberforce.  His  adapted  Roman  books,  and  his 
teaching   concerning   the    Lord's    Supper,    seemed   to   the 

^  Anglicanism   Considered  in  Its  Results.      By  William  Dodsworth,   M.A., 
pp.  91,  92.      London  :  William  Pickering.      1851. 


314  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Bishop  of  Oxford  to  have  a  distinct  tendency  Romeward. 
There  was  a  lengthy  correspondence  between  the  Bishop, 
Pusey,  and  Keble  on  the  subject,  which  may  be  read  in  the 
Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  and  in  the  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey. 
Wilberforce  considered  that  Pusey  was  a  "decoy  bird" 
who  led  people  into  the  Papal  net,  which  he  had  no  inten- 
tion of  entering  himself.  "  I  do  not  mean  that  he  intends 
any  such  thing  ;  I  am  quite  sure  that  he  does  not."  ^  Still, 
however  good  Pusey's  intentions  may  have  been,  the  result 
was,  in  the  Bishop's  opinion,  the  same.  So  at  last  he  had 
to  privately  inhibit  him  from  officiating  in  the  Diocese  of 
Oxford,  except  in  the  parish  of  Pusey,  for  two  years. 
"You  seem  to  me,"  the  Bishop  wrote  to  Pusey,  "to  be 
habitually  assuming  the  place  and  doing  the  work  of  a 
Roman  Confessor,  and  not  that  of  an  English  clergyman. 
Now  I  so  firmly  believe  that  of  all  the  curses  of  Popery  this 
is  the  crowning  curse,  that  I  cannot  allow  voluntarily 
within  my  charge  the  continuance  of  any  ministry  which 
is  infected  by  it."  ^ 

The  great  public  excitement  connected  with  the  Papal 
Aggression  commenced  towards  the  close  of  1850,  by  the 
publication  of  the  Papal  Bull  dividing  England  into  Dioceses 
to  be  filled  by  Bishops  of  his  own  choosing.  The  Pro- 
testant opposition  to  the  Pope's  action  found  but  little 
support  from  the  Puseyites :  several  of  them,  in  fact, 
actively  opposed  it.  This  attitude  is  partly  accounted  for 
by  the  action  of  Lord  John  Russell,  the  Prime  Minister, 
who,  in  his  famous  Durham  Letter,  attacked,  not  only  the 
Pope,  but  also  his  imitators  in  the  Church  of  England.  His 
lordship's  opinion  of  the  Oxford  Movement  is  thus  explained 
by  his  biographer,  Mr.  Spencer  Walpole  : — "  Lord  John 
had  always  regarded  with  deep  distrust  the  progress  of  the 
great  religious  Movement  which  is  associated  with  the 
names  of  Cardinal  Newman  and  Mr.  Pusey.  Its  votaries, 
he  thought,  were  not  merely  traitors  to  the  Church,  but 
guilty  of  'shocking  profanation.'  They  were,  consciously 
or  unconsciously,  initiating  a  Movement  which  was  leading 
to  Rome,  and  they  were  simultaneously  turning  a  service 

"^  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  ii.  p.  86.  ^  Ibid.  p.  90. 


LORD    JOHN    RUSSELL'S    DURHAM    LETTER  315 

of  remembrance  into  an  offensive  spectacle."  ^  It  is  evident 
from  this  that  Lord  John  Russell  ever  looked  upon  Trac- 
tarianism  as  a  Romeward  Movement.  He  feared  that 
"nothing  but  the  erection  of  a  priestly  supremacy  over 
the  Crown  and  people  would  satisfy  the  party  in  the  Church 
who  now  take  the  lead  in  agitation."  ^  In  his  letter  to  the 
Bishop  of  Durham  his  lordship  said  : — 

"There  is  a  danger,  however,  which  alarms  me  much  more  than 
any  aggression  of  a  foreign  Sovereign.  Clergymen  of  our  own 
Church,  who  have  subscribed  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles  and  acknow- 
ledged in  explicit  terms  the  Queen's  supremacy,  have  been  most 
forward  in  leading  their  flocks  '  step  by  step  to  the  very  verge  of  the 
precipice.'  The  lionour  paid  to  Saints,  the  claim  of  Infallibility  for 
the  Church,  the  superstitious  use  of  the  sign  of  the  Cross,  the  mut- 
tering of  the  Liturgy  so  as  to  disguise  the  language  in  which  it  is 
written,  the  recommendation  of  Auricular  Confession,  and  the 
administration  of  penance  and  absolution — all  these  things  are 
pointed  out  by  clergymen  of  the  Church  of  England  as  worthy  of 
adoption,  and  are  now  openly  reprehended  by  the  Bishop  of  London 
in  his  Charge  to  the  clergy  of  his  diocese. 

"What  then  is  the  danger  to  be  apprehended  from  a  foreign 
prince  of  no  great  power,  compared  to  the  danger  within  the  gates 
from  the  unworthy  sons  of  the  Church  of  England  herself? 

"  I  have  little  hope  that  the  propounders  and  framers  of  these 
innovations  will  desist  from  their  insidious  course.  But  I  rely 
with  confidence  on  the  people  of  England ;  and  I  will  not  bate  a  jot 
of  heart  or  hope,  so  long  as  the  glorious  principles  and  the  immortal 
Martyrs  of  the  Reformation  shall  be  held  in  reverence  by  the  great 
mass  of  a  nation  which  looks  with  contempt  on  the  mummeries  of 
superstition,  and  with  scorn  at  the  laborious  endeavours  which  are 
now  making  to  confine  the  intellect  and  enslave  the  soul."  ^ 

The  words  cited  in  this  letter,  "  step  by  step  to  the  very 
verge  of  the  precipice,"  were  a  quotation  from  the  Charge 
of  the  Bishop  of  London,  delivered  on  November  2nd.  In 
that  Charge  Dr.  Blomfield,  as  a  High  Churchman,  expressed 
his  strong  disapproval  of  the  Gorham  judgment,  and  ad- 
vocated the  doctrine  of  Baptismal  Regeneration.  He  then 
went  on  to  make  a  strong  attack  on  the  Puseyite  party,  who 

^  Life  of  Lord  John  Russell.     By  Spencer  Walpole,  vol.  ii.  p.  115. 
2  Ibid.  p.  117.  *  Ibid.  p.  120. 


3l6  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

he    held  responsible   mainly  for  the  many  secessions    to 
Rome  which  had  recently  taken  place  : — 

"But,"  said  the  Bishop,  "there  is  another  very  important  con- 
sideration suggested  to  us  by  the  recent  lamentable  secessions  from 
our  Church.  It  may  well  occur  to  us  to  enquire  how  far  the  way 
may  have  been  paved  for  them,  in  some  instances  at  least,  by  the 
growth  of  opinions  and  practices  in  our  own  Reformed  Church,  at 
variance,  if  not  with  the  letter,  yet  with  the  spirit,  of  its  teaching 
and  ordinances.  I  am  unwilling  to  condemn,  without  reserve,  the 
motives  of  those  among  the  clergy  who  have  thought  themselves  at 
liberty  to  imitate,  as  nearly  as  it  is  possible  to  imitate,  without  a 
positive  infringement  of  the  law,  the  forms  and  ceremonies  of  the 
Church  of  Rome.  .  .  .  Concessions  to  error  can  never  really  serve 
the  cause  of  truth.  If  some  few  have  been  thus  retained  within  the 
pale  of  our  Church,  many  others  have  been  gradually  trained  for 
secession  from  it.  A  taste  has  been  excited  in  them  for  forms  and 
observances  which  has  stimulated  without  satisfying  their  appetite, 
and  they  have  naturally  sought  for  fuller  gratification  in  the  Church 
of  Rome.  They  have  been  led,  step  by  step,  to  the  very  verge  of 
the  precipice,  and  then,  to  the  surprise  and  disappointment  of  their 
guides,  have  fallen  over.  I  know  that  this  has  happened  in  some 
instances.     I  have  no  doubt  of  its  having  happened  in  many. 

"  Then,  with  respect  to  doctrine,  what  can  be  better  calculated 
to  lead  the  less  learned,  or  the  less  thoughtful,  members  of  our 
Protestant  Church  to  look  with  complacency  upon  the  errors  which 
their  Church  has  renounced,  and  at  length  to  embrace  them,  than 
to  have  books  of  devotion  put  into  their  hands  by  their  own  clergy- 
men, in  which  all  but  Divine  honour  is  paid  to  the  Virgin  Mary  ?  A 
propitiatory  virtue  is  attributed  to  the  Eucharist — the  mediation  of 
the  Saints  is  spoken  of  as  a  probable  doctrine — Prayer  for  the  Dead 
urged  as  a  positive  duty — and  a  superstitious  use  of  the  sign  of  the 
Cross  is  recommended  as  profitable ;  add  to  this  the  secret  practice 
of  Auricular  Confession,  the  use  of  Crucifixes  and  Rosaries,  the 
administration  of  what  is  termed  the  Sacrament  of  Penance,  and  it 
is  manifest  that  they  who  are  taught  to  believe  that  such  things  are 
compatible  with  the  principles  of  the  English  Church,  must  also 
believe  it  to  be  separated  from  that  of  Rome  by  a  faint  and  almost 
imperceptible  line,  and  be  prepared  to  pass  that  line  without  much 
fear  of  incurring  the  guilt  of  schism. 

**  Then  with  regard  to  the  mode  of  celebrating  Divine  worship, 
it  has  been  a  subject  of  great  uneasiness  to  me  to  see  the  changes 
which  have  been  introduced  by  a  few  of  the  clergy,  at  variance,  as 


ST.    PAUL'S,    KNIGHTSBRIDGE  317 

I  think,  with  the  spirit  of  the  Church's  directions,  and,  in  some 
instances,  with  the  letter.  .  .  .  These  innovations  have,  in  some 
instances,  been  carried  to  such  a  length  as  to  render  the  Church 
service  almost  histrionic.  I  really  cannot  characterise  by  a  gentler 
term  the  continual  changes  of  posture,  the  frequent  genuflexions,  the 
crossings,  the  peculiarities  of  dress,  and  some  of  the  decorations  of 
Churches  to  which  I  allude.  They  are,  after  all,  a  poor  imitation  of 
the  Roman  ceremonial,  and  furnish,  I  have  no  doubt,  to  the  obser- 
vant members  of  that  Church,  a  subject,  on  the  one  hand,  of  ridicule, 
as  being  a  faint  and  meagre  copy  of  their  own  gaudy  ritual ;  and,  on 
the  other  hand,  of  exultation,  as  preparing  those  who  take  delight 
in  them  to  seek  a  fuller  gratification  of  their  taste  in  the  Roman 
communion." 

In  all  this  the  Bishop  had  only  stated  the  truth.  There 
was  nothing  of  exaggeration  in  his  description  of  what 
was  taking  place.  No  doubt  he  had  specially  in  his  mind 
what  was  going  on  at  the  moment  in  St.  Barnabas'  Church, 
Pimlico,  under  the  Rev.  W.  J.  E.  Bennett,  Vicar  of  St.  Paul's, 
Knightsbridge,  of  which  St.  Barnabas'  was  then  a  District 
Chapel-of-Ease.  From  a  Farewell  Letter  to  his  Parish- 
ioners,  issued  by  Mr.  Bennett  after  his  resignation  of 
St.  Paul's,  I  learn  that  he  was  appointed  to  work  in 
the  parish  in  1840,  that  he  assisted  in  building  the  new 
Church  of  St.  Paul's,  Knightsbridge,  and  that  not  very 
long  after  complaints  as  to  his  mode  of  conducting 
Divine  Service  were  frequently  forwarded  to  the  Bishop 
of  London,  and  many  more  were  made  directly  to  himself. 
"  On  one  occasion,"  said  Mr.  Bennett,  "  a  person  coming 
from  abroad  informed  me  that,  for  all  the  world,  the 
Church  of  St.  Paul's  was  nothing  more  than  he  had  just 
seen  at  Paris  and  at  Rome.  To  which  I  replied,  How 
happy  it  was  that  members  of  the  Church  of  England 
could  be  in  any  way  like  the  great  bulk  of  Christendom, 
for  it  seemed  like  the  beginning  of  unity."  ^  In  the  year 
1849,  during  a  pestilence  in  London,  Mr.  Bennett  printed 
and  circulated  a  Form  of  Prayer,  to  be  used  privately, 
containing  Prayers  for  the  Dead.  The  Bishop  of  London 
wrote   to   him   about   it,    and   strongly    objected   to   such 

*  A  Farewell  Letter  to  his  Parishioners.     By  the  Rev.  W.  J.  E.  Bennett,  p.  24. 
London  :  Cleaver.     1851. 


3l8  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

prayers.  A  lengthy  correspondence  followed ;  ^  but  Mr. 
Bennett,  notwithstanding  his  oath  of  obedience  to  his 
Bishop,  refused  to  yield  to  his  clearly  expressed  wishes. 
On  June  lo,  1850,  the  new  Chapel-of-Ease,  afterwards 
known  as  St.  Barnabas'  Church,  Pimlico,  was  consecrated 
by  the  Bishop  of  London.  It  was  not  long  before  Ritual- 
istic practices,  which  were  then  thought  very  advanced, 
were  observed  in  the  new  Church.  One  of  the  Curates, 
finding  things  going  so  far  wrong,  could  endure  it  no 
longer,  and  went  to  the  Bishop  of  London  with  a  view 
to  his  resignation,  not  to  complain  of  Mr.  Bennett,  who 
alone  was  responsible  for  what  went  on  at  St.  Barnabas'. 
The  Bishop,  of  course,  questioned  him  as  to  the  matters 
he  objected  to,  and  having  thus  learnt  what  was  going 
on,  he  wrote  on  July  ist  to  Mr.  Bennett,  stating  that  he 
had  been  informed  upon  authority  he  could  not  doubt, 
that  in  St.  Barnabas'  Church  (i)  at  Holy  Communion  he 
celebrated  standing  in  the  centre  of  the  west  side  of  the 
table,  with  his  back  to  the  congregation  ;  (2)  that  he  did 
not  give  the  cup  into  the  hands  of  the  communicants, 
but  put  it  to  their  lips ;  (3)  that  in  some  instances  he 
had  not  given  the  bread  into  the  hands  of  the  communi- 
cants, but  had  put  it  into  their  mouths  ;  (4)  that  he 
prefaced  the  sermon  with  an  invocation  of  the  Trinity ; 
(5)  that  at  this  invocation  before  the  sermon  the  clergy 
rose  up  and  crossed  themselves ;  and  (6)  that  he  had 
administered  Extreme  Unction  to  a  young  lady.  To 
this  letter  Mr.  Bennett  replied  on  July  15th,  denying 
absolutely  the  last  charge,  and  admitting  the  truth  of 
all  the  other  charges,  except  that  as  to  not  putting  the 
elements  into  the  hands  of  the  communicants  ;  this  was, 
he  explained,  true  only  of  six  communicants,  and  that 
by  their  special  request,  but  that  since  receiving  his  lord- 
ship's letter  he  had  spoken  to  the  six,  who  had  agreed 
to  give  up  the  practice  complained  of.  Mr.  Bennett,  at 
some  length,  defended  these  practices,  but  did  not  promise 
to  give  up  more  than  the  last  named,  and  he  said  to  the 
Bishop  : — "  If  you  think,  upon  reading  what  I  have  said, 

*  Bennett's  Farewell  Letter  to  his  Parishioners,  pp.  44-61. 


RIOTS    AT    ST.    BARNABAS',    PIMLICO  319 

that  the  picture  of  my  mind  is  not  that  which  could  justify 
my  remaining  in  the  cure  of  souls  in  your  lordship's 
diocese,  I  am  ready  and  willing  to  depart."  ^  After  writing 
this  letter  Mr.  Bennett  says  that  three  months  elapsed 
before  he  received  any  reply,  during  which  "all  the 
practices  complained  of  were  continued  without  varia- 
tion." 2  On  October  i8th  the  Bishop  wrote  again,  ex- 
pressing himself  as  not  at  all  satisfied  with  Mr.  Bennett's 
explanations  and  defence,  and  requiring  him  to  give  up 
the  practices  to  which  he  objected.  To  this  Mr.  Bennett 
replied  on  October  30th  : — "  It  grieves  me  to  say  that, 
after  having  conscientiously  considered  all  the  bearings 
of  the  matter,  I  find  that  I  am  unable  to  withdraw  or 
alter  anything  that  I  have  said  or  done,"  and  he  offered 
to  resign  his  living  if  the  Bishop  called  on  him  to  do 
so.  ^  Soon  after  Mr.  Bennett  presented  a  young  gentle- 
man to  the  Bishop  to  be  ordained  to  the  Curacy  of  St. 
Barnabas',  but  his  lordship  refused  to  ordain  him  on  Mr. 
Bennett's  nomination.  The  Bishop  of  London's  Charge 
was  delivered,  as  already  stated,  on  November  2nd,  con- 
demning the  Puseyites  in  strong  terms.  On  November 
5th,  Lord  John  Russell's  letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Durham, 
dated  November  4th,  was  published  in  the  daily  papers. 
On  Sunday,  November  loth,  riots  broke  out  in  St. 
Barnabas'  Church,  which  were  renewed  on  the  following 
Sunday — a  method  of  protest  with  which,  I  may  be  per- 
mitted to  state,  I  have  no  sympathy  whatever.  It  has 
ever  been  injurious  to  the  Protestant  cause,  and  can  only 
benefit  the  Romanisers.  Here  were  a  number  of,  I  sup- 
pose, Protestant  people,  going  to  Church  to  protest 
against  lawlessness  by  committing  acts  of  violent  lawless- 
ness themselves.  The  principle  of  taking  the  law  into  our 
own  hands,  as  separate  individuals,  seems  to  me  to  be  the 
root  evil  of  Anarchy. 

On  December  4th,  Mr.  Bennett  sent  in  his  resignation,  by 
demand  of  the  Bishop,  of  his  living.  -A  few  days  before  this 
Mr.  Bennett  published  A  First  Letter  to  Lord  John  Russell, 
which  is  remarkable  for  its  unsparing  and  just  exposure  of 

1  Bennett's  Fare-well  Letter  to  his  Faris/iioners,  p.  84. 
^  Ibid.  p.  86.  ^  Ibid.  pp.  91,  92. 


320  HISTORY    OF   THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

the  way  in  which  his  lordship  had  been  supporting  Popery 
for  many  years,  and  for  its  acknowledgment  that  Auricular 
Confession,  as  practised  by  the  Puseyite  clergy,  was  in  itself 
identical  with  that  of  the  Church  of  Rome.  On  this  latter 
point,  Mr.  Bennett's  words  are  : — "  Sufficient  it  is  to  me  to 
call  your  attention  to  the  fact,  that  Confession  to  a  priest 
(commonly  called  Auricular  Confession),  is  advocated  and 
pronounced  useful  by  the  English  Church.  The  only  differ- 
ence you  will  observe  between  the  Church  of  Rome  and 
ourselves  being  this,  that  Rome  makes  such  Confession 
absolutely  necessary  for  salvation  ;  the  other  leaves  it  as  a 
voluntary  act,  to  be  used  or  not  used,  according  to  the 
spiritual  needs  of  the  penitent."  ^  A  few  weeks  later  Dr. 
Pusey  had  the  audacity  to  say  that : — "  I  am  not  aware  that 
any  Divine  or  Bishop  in  our  Church,  since  the  Reformation, 
has  excepted  against  anything,  except  making  Confession 
compulsory."  ^  The  truth  is,  that  almost  all  our  Divines  and 
Bishops  since  the  Reformation,  down  to  the  commencement 
of  the  Oxford  Movement,  were  deadly  enemies  of  the  Con- 
fessional itself,  as  conducted  by  Pusey,  excepting  only  the 
Laudian  Divines.  A  large  number  of  Mr.  Bennett's  congre- 
gation took  his  part  in  his  controversy  with  the  Bishop,  and 
an  effort  was  made  to  keep  him  in  the  living  by  an  appeal 
to  a  Court  of  law.  A  legal  opinion  was  taken  on  this  ques- 
tion, but  as  it  was  decidedly  adverse  to  any  appeal  to  a 
Court,  the  proposed  proceedings  were  necessarily  dropped. 
Towards  the  end  of  1850,  another  fierce  controversy 
arose  at  St.  Saviour's,  Leeds.  The  Bishop  of  Ripon  had 
had  painful  experience  of  the  evasive  and  Romanising  con- 
duct of  the  clergy  of  that  church.  In  June  1850,  his  lord- 
ship informed  one  of  its  clergy  that  "  the  proceedings  of  the 
clergy  of  St.  Saviour's  were  of  such  a  character  as  to  destroy 
all  my  confidence  in  them  ;  and  that  their  study  seemed  to 
be  how  far  they  could  evade  their  Bishop's  known  wishes, 
without  violating  the  letter  of  the  law."  ^     In  the  month  of 

^  A  First  Letter  to  Lord  John  Russell.  By  the  Rev.  W.  J.  E.  Bennett,  p.  43. 
London :  Cleaver.    1850. 

*  A  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  London,  By  the  Rev.  E.  B.  Pusey,  D.D.,  p.  3. 
Oxford  :  185 1. 

^  A  Letter  to  the  Parishioners  of  St.  Saviouf's,  L.eeds.  By  the  Bishop  of 
Ripon,  p.  29.     London  :  Rivington.     1851. 


TWO    TRAITOROUS    RESOLUTIONS  32 1 

October  1850,  a  meeting  of  twelve  clergymen  was  held  at 
St.  Saviour's,  at  which  the  two  following  resolutions,  which 
clearly  show  the  traitorous  spirit  of  those  who  passed  them, 
were  carried  tinanimousfy : — 

"  That  the  very  existence  of  the  English  Church  involves  the 
principle  of  her  submission,  in  matters  of  faith,  to  the  Church 
Catholic." 

"  That  her  national  history,  previous  to  the  Reformation,  indi- 
cates that  such  submission  can  only  be  tnade  thro7igh  the  fiiedium  of  the 
Papal  See."  1 

Of  course  these  were  thoroughly  dishonest  resolutions, 
which  reflected  the  utmost  disgrace  on  the  clergy  of  the 
Church  of  England  who  passed  them,  and  fully  justified  the 
strong  remarks  of  the  Bishop  of  Ripon  about  the  clergy  of 
St.  Saviour's,  in  his  letter  to  the  parishioners  : — *'  For  my 
own  part,"  said  the  Bishop,  "  I  shall  refrain  from  saying 
more  than  that  their  conduct  has  verified,  in  a  remarkable 
and  very  painful  manner,  the  statement  which  I  had  made 
in  my  Episcopal  Charge  three  months  only  previous,  that 
*  the  nearer  persons  approach  to  the  Roman  system,  the 
more  will  their  powers  of  judgment  be  perverted,  their  moral 
sense  blunted,  and  an  obliquity  of  moral  vision  superinduced, 
blinding  them  more  and  more  to  the  simplicity  of  Christian 
truth,  and  estranging  them  more  and  more  from  the  sincerity 
of  Christian  practice."  ^ 

The  Rev.  J.  H.  Pollen,  who  for  a  time  was  one  of  the 
Curates  of  St.  Saviour's,  frankly  admits  that  this  meeting 
was  held,  and  he  says  that  the  clergy  present  "came  to 
resolutions  to  the  effect  that  the  English  Church  was  sub- 
ject to  the  Catholic  Church  as  regards  the  faith.  That  now 
was  a  time  when  she  needed  to  refer  to  that  tribunal  for 
support  and  guidance — that  the  Apostolic  See  had  hitherto 
been  the  only  access  to  that  voice."  ^ 

Early  in  December  a  majority  of  the  clergy  of  Leeds 
requested  the  Bishop  of  Ripon  to  hold  a  commission  for 
the  purpose  of  investigating  certain  charges  to  be  brought 
against  the  clergy  of  St.  Saviour's.      Dr.  Hook,  Vicar  of 

^  A  Litter  to  the  Parishioners  of  St.  Saviour's,  Leeds.  By  the  Bishop  of 
Ripon,  p,  29.  2  Ibid.  p.  15. 

2  Narrative  of  Five  Years  at  St.  Saviour's,  Leeds.  By  the  Rev.  J.  H.  Pollen, 
p.  166.     Oxford:  J.  Vincent.      1851. 

X 


32  2  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Leeds,  shortly  before  had  pubhcly  separated  himself  from 
the  advanced  section  of  his  party.  In  a  preface  to  two 
sermons  he  had  preached,  the  Vicar  of  Leeds  said : — "  I 
take  leave  to  make  a  wide  distinction  between  a  Romaniser 
and  a  High  Churchman." 

"  But  when,"  wrote  Dr.  Hook,  "  I  now  find  them  [the  Roman- 
isers]  calumniators  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  vindicators  of  the 
Church  of  Rome ;  palliating  the  vices  of  the  Romish  system,  and 
magnifying  the  deficiencies  of  the  Church  of  England ;  sneering  at 
everything  Anglican,  and  admiring  everything  Romish ;  students  of 
the  Breviary  and  Missal,  disciples  of  the  Schoolmen,  converts  to 
mediaevalism,  insinuating  Romish  sentiments,  circulating  and  re- 
publishing Romish  works ;  introducing  Romish  practices  in  their 
private,  and  infusing  a  Romish  tone  into  their  public  devotions ; 
introducing  the  Romish  Confessional,  enjoining  Romish  penances, 
adopting  Romish  prostrations,  recommending  Romish  Litanies ;  mut- 
tering the  Romish  shibboleth,  and  rejoicing  in  the  cant  of  Romish 
fanaticism,  assuming  sometimes  the  garb  of  the  Romish  priesthood, 
and  venerating  without  imitating  their  celibacy ;  defending  Romish 
miracles,  and  receiving  as  true  the  lying  legends  of  Rome ;  almost 
adoring  Romish  saints,  and  complaining  that  we  have  had  no  saints  in 
England  since  we  purified  our  Church  ;  explaining  away  the  idolatry, 
and  pining  for  the  Mariolatry  of  the  Church  of  Rome  ;  vituperating 
the  English  Reformation,  and  receiving  for  truth  the  false  doctrines 
of  the  Council  of  Trent ;  when  I  hear  them  whispering  in  the  ears 
of  credulous  ignorance,  in  high  places  as  well  as  low,  that  the  two 
Churches  are  in  principle  the  same ;  when  they  who  were  once  in 
the  pit  on  the  one  side  of  the  wall,  have  now  tumbled  over  on  the 
other  side,  and  have  fallen  into  *  a  lower  deep  still  gaping  to  devour 
them ' ;  I  conceive  that  I  am  bound  as  a  High  Churchman  to  re- 
main stationary,  and  not  to  follow  them  in  their  downfalling.  I 
believe  it  to  be  incumbent  upon  every  High  Churchman  to  declare 
plainly  that  it  is  not  merely  in  detail,  that  it  is  not  merely  in  the 
application  of  our  principles  themselves,  that  we  differ  from  the 
Church  of  Rome ;  and  that  no  man  can  secede  to  Rome,  the  system 
of  which  is  opposed  to  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,  without  placing 
his  soul  in  peril,  and  risking  his  salvation.  ...  It  is  not  against 
Rotnatiists  but  against  Romanisers  that  we  write ;  against  those  who 
are  doing  the  work  of  the  Church  of  Rome  while  eating  the  bread 
of  the  Church  of  England."  ^ 

^  Life  of  Dean  Hook,  vol.  ii.  pp.  27S,  279. 


THE    LEEDS    CONFESSIONAL    CASE  323 

The  Bishop  of  Ripon  held  his  inquiry  concerning  St. 
Saviour's  Church  in  the  vestry  of  Leeds  Parish  Church,  on 
December  14  and  15,  1850.  Dr.  Hook  was  present,  and 
the  inquiry  extended  itself  into  all  the  Romanising  practices 
and  doctrines  of  the  accused  clergy.  But  the  chief  subject 
considered  was  a  charge  against  the  Rev.  H.  F.  Beckett, 
one  of  the  Curates,  of  hearing  the  confession  of  a  married 
woman  (who  appeared  as  a  witness),  without  the  knowledge 
of  her  husband,  and  then  asking  her  shockingly  indelicate 
and  indecent  questions.  Of  this  witness  the  Bishop  subse- 
quently stated : — "  Every  attempt  was  made,  but  in  vain,  to 
invalidate  her  simple,  straightforward  testimony  ;  and  no 
imputation  was  ever  cast  upon  her  general  integrity."  ^ 
After  the  inquiry  the  Bishop  wrote  to  Mr.  Beckett  : — "  It 
appeared  in  evidence  which  you  did  not  contradict,  and 
could  not  shake  by  any  cross-examination,  that  Mr.  Rooke, 
who  was  then  a  deacon,  having  required  a  married  woman 
who  was  a  candidate  for  confirmation  to  go  for  Confession 
to  you  as  a  priest,  you  received  that  female  to  confession 
under  these  circumstances,  and  that  you  put  to  her  ques- 
tions which  she  says  made  her  feel  very  much  ashamed  and 
greatly  distressed  her,  and  which  were  of  such  an  indelicate 
nature  that  she  would  never  tell  her  husband  of  them."  ^ 
Mr.  Beckett  replied  to  the  Bishop's  letter,  but  he  did  not 
dare  to  deny  the  truth  of  the  charges  brought  against  him. 
He  made,  however,  one  remarkable  assertion,  which  hus- 
bands whose  wives  go  to  Confession  would  do  well  to  bear 
in  mind.  "  No  woman,"  he  said,  "  would,  I  suppose,  ever  tell 
her  husband  what  had  passed  in  her  Confession  "  ;  ^  and  as  to 
asking  questions  of  the  penitent,  he  wrote  : — "  The  asking  of 
questions  according  to  the  discretion  of  the  Confessor  is, 
your  lordship  must  see,  absolutely  necessary  to  make  Con- 
fession of  value  to  those  who  have  recourse  to  it."  * 

It  was  thought  absolutely  necessary  by  the  Bishop  of 
Ripon  (afterwards  Archbishop  of  Canterbury)  to  print  some 
of  the  indecent  questions  which  this  Puseyite  priest  put  to 

^  A  Letter  to  the  Parishioners  of  St.  Saviour's,  Leeds.   By  the  Bishop  of  Ripon, 

P-  31- 

*  Ibid.  p.  37.  8  Ibid.  p.  38. 

*  Ibid.  p.  39. 


324  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

this  woman  in  the  Confessional.^  All  that  I  can  say  about 
them  here  is  that  if  any  husband,  be  he  Protestant  or 
Ritualist,  knew  that  his  wife  was  asked  those  questions 
in  Confession  by  her  Ritualistic  Confessor,  the  next  time 
that  Confessor  came  to  that  husband's  house  he  would 
knock  him  down  flat,  and  afterwards  kick  him  out  of  the 
house,  I  do  not  say  the  husband  ought  to  act  thus  :  I  only 
affirm  that  he  could  not  very  well  help  doing  so.  And  I 
am  quite  certain  that  the  filthy-tongued  Confessor,  who 
asked  such  obscene  questions,  would  deserve  all  that  he 
got  from  an  outraged  and  justly  indignant  husband.  Ordi- 
nary men  of  the  world  would  be  ashamed  to  ask  such 
questions  ;  but  these  brazen-faced  Puseyite  priests  of  St. 
Saviour's,  Leeds,  gloried  in  their  shame.  They  issued  a 
Statement  of  their  case,  in  which  they  had  the  audacity 
to  justify  Father  Confessors  in  asking  penitents,  male  or 
female,  indecent  questions.  As  this,  to  my  ordinary  readers, 
will  seem  almost  incredible,  I  give  their  justification  of  such 
dirty  conduct  in  the  priests'  own  words  : — 

"We  now  come,"  said  the  clergy  of  St.  Saviour's,  "to  the  second 
charge,  relied  on  by  the  Bishop,  against  Mr.  Beckett.  The  same 
witness  states  that  certain  questions  which  he  asked  her  were  very 
indelicate. 

"To  those  who  do  not  recognise  the  presence  of  Almighty  God 
in  the  ministrations  of  the  Confessional,  it  may  seem  that  an  '  in- 
delicate '  question  may  be  a  wrong  one.  But  we  believe  that  He 
who  has  created  physicians  for  bodily  sickness,  and  by  them  is 
pleased  to  effect  many  merciful  cures,  has  ordained  other  physicians 
in  His  Church  for  tlie  relief  of  men's  spiritual  disorders ;  and  that 
there  is  an  analogy  between  the  discretion  which  we  willingly  con- 
cede to  those  whom  we  consult  for  the  health  of  our  bodies,  and 
that  which  must  be  exercised  by  the  physicians  of  the  soul.  If  this 
be  true,  a  question  in  itself  indelicate  ceases  to  be  so  when  it  is 
known  to  be  important  to  the  safe  treatment  of  the  sufferer's  case ; 
and  woe  be  to  those  who  countenance  the  vicious  refinement  of 
this  generation,  and  abet  the  world  in  its  unceasing  efforts  to  place 
a  false  delicacy  between  the  soul  and  its  salvation.  It  would  doubt- 
less be  indelicate,  were  it  not  in  the  highest  degree  necessary,  to 
drag  sin  from  its  lurking-place,  and  expose  it  to  the  sinner's  view; 

^  A  Letter  to  the  Parishioners  of  St.  Saviour^s,  Leeds.  By  the  Bishop  of 
Ripon,  p.  32. 


INDECENT    QUESTIONS    DEFENDED  325 

but  that  there  is  often  a  paramount  necessity  for  doing  this,  will  be 
doubted  by  none  whose  earnest  thoughts  of  sin  and  of  repentance, 
of  God's  wrath  and  of  acceptance  with  Him,  have  not  been  checked 
and  stunted,  chilled  or  blasted,  by  the  breath  of  Lutheran  heresy 
and  Socinian  unbelief.  Whether  such  a  necessity  existed  in  the  case 
which  has  led  the  Bishop  to  visit  Mr.  Beckett  with  his  severest 
displeasure,  is  known,  and  will  be  known,  to  none  but  God  and  Mr. 
Beckett  himself.  He  was  asked  by  Mr.  Randall,  at  the  'investiga- 
tion,' whether  he  would  have  put  the  same  questions  to  his  (Mr. 
Randall's)  wife  ?  to  which  he  replied  that  under  the  same  circum- 
stances he  would  have  put  the  same  questions,  not  only  to  Mr. 
Randall's  wife,  but  even  to  Mr.  Randall  himself."  ^ 

A  defence  of  this  kind  is  simply  a  slander  on  an  honour- 
able profession.  No  medical  man  of  honour  would  ever 
ask  a  patient  such  questions  as  those  put  to  this  woman  in 
the  Confessional.  And  even  if,  in  some  points,  the  analogy 
were  to  hold  good,  yet  it  would  fail  in  this.  The  priest  in 
the  Confessional  is  not  a  physician  but  a  quack,  who  kills 
souls,  instead  of  curing  them.  The  whole  system  of  Con- 
fession on  these  indelicate  lines  is  abhorrent  to  every 
enlightened  Christian.  It  pollutes  both  Confessor  and 
penitent. 

The  result  of  the  Bishop's  investigation  was  that  all  the 
clergy  of  St.  Saviour's,  with  one  exception,  seceded  to  the 
Church  of  Rome.  Out  of  fifteen  clergy  who  had  laboured 
in  that  Church  since  its  consecration  in  1845,  ^^  fewer  than 
nine  had  now  seceded  to  the  Church  of  Rome.  So  much 
for  the  first  attempt  to  exhibit  the  Oxford  Movement  in 
operation. 

^   The  Statement  of  the  Clergy  of  St.  Savioui's,  Leeds,   in  Reference  i«  the 
Recent  Proceedings  Against  Them,  p.  9.     Leeds  :  S.  Morrish.     1851. 


CHAPTER   XII 

The  Bristol  Church  Union — Pusey  objects  to  a  protest  against  Rome — 
Archbishop  Tait  on  the  Church  Discipline  Act — The  Judicial  Com- 
mittee of  Privy  Council — Lay  Address  to  the  Queen — Her  Majesty's 
action  in  response — Lay  Address  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury — 
The  appeal  to  the  Bishops — An  Episcopal  Manifesto — A  Clerical  and 
Lay  Declaration  in  support  of  the  Gorham  judgment — The  Confes- 
sional at  Plymouth^ — Revival  and  reform  of  Convocation — Prosecu- 
tion of  Archdeacon  Denison — The  power  and  privileges  of  examining 
chaplains — The  Archbishop's  Commission  of  Inquiry — The  Arch- 
bishop's judgment  at  Bath — How  the  Archdeacon  evaded  punishment 
— Pusey  hoists  the  flag  of  rebellion — The  protest  against  the  Bath 
judgment— The  Society  of  the  Holy  Cross— The  Association  for  the 
Promotion  of  the  Unity  of  Christendom — Startling  revelations  as  to 
its  early  history — Secret  negotiations  with  Rome — De  Lisle's  secret 
letter  to  Cardinal  Barnabo — The  Cardinal's  answer — Newman  con- 
sulted by  De  Lisle — The  conspirators  meet  in  London— Their  secret, 
traitorous,  and  treacherous  message  to  the  Pope — The  case  of  IVes- 
terton  v.  Liddell — Judgment — A  Ritualistic  rebel. 

A  NUMBER  of  independent  "  Church  Unions,"  formed  by  the 
Tractarians,  had  been  in  existence  for  several  years  when 
the  Papal  Aggression  commenced.  The  first  of  these,  called 
the  Bristol  Union,  was  formed  in  1844,  to  which  were  sub- 
sequently affiliated  a  number  of  local  Church  Unions 
throughout  the  country,  all  having  the  promotion  of  High 
Church  principles  as  their  chief  object.  In  addition  to 
these,  but  working  independently  on  similar  lines,  were  the 
Metropolitan  Church  Union,  and  the  London  Church  Union. 
One  of  the  chief  promoters  of  the  Bristol  Church  Union 
was  the  Rev.  William  Palmer,  whose  Narrative  of  Events 
Connected  with  the  Tracts  for  the  Times,  published  in  1843, 
was,  as  I  have  already  stated,  the  first  effectual  exposure  of 
the  Romanising  party  which  had  appeared  up  to  that  date. 
At  the  time  of  the  Papal  Aggression  Mr.  Palmer  was  very 
much  alarmed  at  the  prospect  of  the  extreme  division  of 

the  Puseyites,  under  their  leader  Dr.  Pusey,  capturing  all  the 

326 


THE    PUSEYITE    CHURCH    UNIONS  327 

Church  Unions  throughout  the  country.  He  wished  these 
Unions  to  be  regulated  by  those  High  Church  principles 
which  had  ever  guided  his  own  conduct.  The  London 
Church  Union,  which  was  then  managed  by  the  extreme 
section,  was  anxious  to  become  the  centre  of  the  whole  of 
the  Church  Unions  of  the  country,  and  thus  bring  them  all 
under  the  guidance  of  men  in  whom  moderate  High  Church- 
men could  place  no  trust.  That  Mr.  Palmer's  fears  were 
not  without  foundation  is  proved  by  a  letter  written  to  Mr. 
A.  Beresford  Hope,  M.P.,  by  Dr.  Pusey,  on  October  3,  1850. 
The  Metropolitan  Church  Union,  to  which  he  refers  at  the 
commencement  of  his  letter,  was  not,  at  that  time— so  Mr. 
Palmer  states^ — under  Tractarian  (though  it  was  under 
High  Church)  guidance. 

"  My  dear  Hope, — All  hope  of  reconciliation  with  the  Metro- 
politan is  now  plainly  at  an  end.  But  something  must  be  done  to 
prevent  their  absorbing  the  whole  Church  Movement  into  their 
hands,  at  which  they  are  evidently  aiming.  Some  are  ambitious  for 
the  Metropolitan  ;  Palmer  wishes  to  get  rid  of  J.  K.[eble]  and  my- 
self; Dr.  Biber  to  put  forward  himself. 

"Might  not  the  I,ondon  Union  unite  itself  more  closely  with 
some  of  the  others  ?  as  the  Bristol,  the  South- Eastern,  the  Yorks, 
&c.  .  .  . 

"  One  great  Union,  such  as  Badeley  suggests,  which  should  take 
in  all  England,  and  have  leading  clergy  or  laity  from  every  diocese 
on  its  Committee  (the  distrusts  would  not  often  be  then)  would  be 
immense  strength. 

"The  members  of  this  great  Union  in  each  diocese  might 
assemble  in  their  diocese,  at  any  time,  or  regularly  as  now,  and 
any  member  in  the  diocese,  who  was  a  member  of  the  Central  Com- 
mittee, might  be  the  chairman. 

"  This  (which  B.  suggested)  would  have  much  greater  moral 
strength  than  the  existing  Unions. 

"  I  wish  that  you  would  think  of  this,  or  some  similar  plan.     I 

sent  you  Badeley's  opinion,  which  was  sent  to  J.  K.[eble]  relatively 

to  the  plan  we  were  hoping  might  be  carried  out,  that  all  Unions 

might  be  fused  into  one. — God  bless  you.     Yours  most  faithfully, 

"  E.  B.  Pusey." 
"  London,  Oct,  3." 

^  A  Statemetit  of  Circumstances.     By  William  Palmer,  M.A.,  p.  21.     London  : 
Rivington.     1850. 


328  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

The  idea  here  suggested  by  Pusey  was  eventually  carried 
out  several  years  later  by  the  formation  of  the  English 
Church  Union.  Palmer's  suspicions  were  therefore  well 
founded,  and  so  to  prevent,  if  possible,  what  he  considered 
would  be  a  disaster  to  the  High  Church  cause,  he  gave 
notice  that  at  the  forthcoming  Annual  Meeting  of  the 
Bristol  Church  Union  on  October  ist,  he  would  propose  that 
a  "  Statement  of  Principles "  should  be  adopted  by  the 
Union,  containing  a  protest  against  the  Church  of  Rome 
and  her  errors.  On  hearing  of  this  proposal  Pusey  was 
greatly  alarmed.  A  protest  against  Rome  was  what  he 
hated  with  all  his  heart.  He  was  afraid  that  his  Father 
Confessor,  Keble,  would  approve  of  this  protest,  so  he  wrote 
to  him : — "  If  you  go  along  with  this  plan  I  shall  withdraw 
my  name  from  the  Bristol  Union,  by  a  letter  to  the  Chair- 
man, in  order  not  to  have  any  responsibility  in  the  matter."  ^ 
Canon  Liddon  tells  us  that : — "  Dr.  Mill  suggested  a  resolu- 
tion expressing  love  and  allegiance  to  the  English  Church, 
'  as  reformed  in  the  sixteenth  century.'  Pusey  would  prefer 
to  omit  the  allusion  to  the  sixteenth  century.  It  would 
introduce  a  large  controverted  subject,  and  would  repel 
many  minds.  Pusey  would  have  as  simple  a  statement  as 
possible  ;  a  positive  statement  of  love  for  the  Church  of 
England,  without  a  negative  statement  about  the  Church  of 
Rome."  ^  Keble  at  length  came  over  to  Pusey's  view,  and 
therefore  wrote  : — ''  I  cannot  join  in  any  Anti-Roman 
Declaration  that  I  have  yet  seen,  not  even  in  my  own,  now 
that  I  find  the  terms  of  it  are  equivocal."  ^  At  length  the 
day  arrived  (October  ist),  on  which  the  Bristol  Church 
Union  held  its  annual  meeting.  And  what,  it  may  be  asked, 
was  this  declaration  which  Pusey  and  his  supporters  so 
dreaded  and  hated  ?  It  was  proposed  by  the  Rev.  William 
Palmer,  and  seconded  by  the  Rev.  Prebendary  Clarke,  and 
was  as  follows  : — 

"Statement  of  Principles. 

"  I.  That  the  English  branch  of  the  One  Holy  Catholic   and 
Apostolic   Church,  which   has   reformed   herself,    taking  primitive 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  iii.  p.  275. 

2  Ibid.  p.  275.  *  Ibid.  p.  280. 


STATEMENT    OF    PRINCIPLES  329 

Christianity  as  her  model,  has  a  claim  upon  the  undivided  and 
faithful  allegiance  of  the  whole  English  people. 

"  2.  That  the  Roman  Church  (including  the  other  Churches 
in  communion  with  her)  having  repudiated  communion  with  all 
the  Churches  which  do  not  recognise  the  claims  of  the  Bishop  of 
Rome,  and  having  by  formal  decrees  and  other  authoritative  acts, 
and  in  her  popular  practice,  corrupted  the  primitive  faith  and  worship 
of  the  Holy  Catholic  Church,  and  persisted  in  the  said  claims  and 
corruptions,  communion  with  the  Roman  Church,  on  the  part  of 
Churches,  and  therefore  of  individuals,  of  the  English  Communion, 
cannot,  consistently  with  the  laws  of  Christ,  be  restored,  until  the 
Roman  Church  shall  have  relinquished  her  pretensions  :  and  suffi- 
cient provision  shall  have  been  made  for  the  maintenance  of  Christian 
truth  in  all  its  purity  and  integrity. 

"  3.  That  the  serious  dangers  to  the  faith,  arising  from  the  abuse 
of  private  judgment,  and  from  a  mere  negative  Protestantism,  having 
of  late  years  been  greatly  aggravated  by  the  insidious  propagation  of 
Rationalistic  notions,  and  by  the  encroachments  of  a  Latitudinarian 
State  policy,  it  is  the  duty  of  all  members  of  the  Church  of  England 
to  offer  to  these  several  abuses,  errors,  and  pernicious  principles,  the 
most  active  and  uncompromising  opposition."  ^ 

The  wording  of  the  third  section  of  this  Statement  shows 
that  Mr.  Palmer  was  no  lover  of  decided  Protestantism ; 
nor  can  there  be  a  reasonable  doubt  that  if  there  were 
nothing  more  in  the  Declaration  than  this  section  it  would 
have  been  carried  unanimously.  But,  as  we  have  seen,  the 
Corporate  Reunion  of  the  Church  of  Rome  had  been  the 
chief  object  of  the  leaders  of  the  Oxford  Movement  from 
its  very  birth.  How,  then,  could  they  agree  to  a  Declara- 
tion censuring  either  that  Church,  its  doctrines,  or  its 
practices  ?  And  why  should  they  be  called  upon  to  demand 
that  Rome  should  "  relinquish  her  pretensions,"  or  give  up 
any  of  her  doctrines,  as  a  condition  of  England's  union 
with  her  ?  It  is  true  that  no  reasonably  loyal  Churchman 
could  consistently  object  to  sign  the  second  clause  of  the 
Declaration  ;  but  these  were  not  consistent  or  loyal  Church- 
men, as  their  conduct  on  this  occasion  amply  proved. 
They  were  more  anxious  to  shield  and  protect  the  Church 
of  Rome  from  her  enemies  than  to  defend  the  Church  of 

^  Palmer's  Statement  of  Circumstances,  p.  74. 


330  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

England,  and,  therefore,  Lord  Forbes  proposed,  and  Mr. 
A.  Beresford  Hope,  M.P.,  seconded,  the  following  amend- 
ment, which  was  carried  by  a  large  majority  : — 

"  That  whereas  the  Bristol  Union  was  designed  to  be  a  union 
of  all  Churchmen  desirous  of  co-operating  in  the  promotion  of  cer- 
tain defined  objects,  it  cannot  consent  to  narrow  the  basis  of  its 
constitution  by  identifying  itself  with  an  organisation  which  is  founded 
upon  the  acceptance  of  a  Declaration  of  faith  over  and  above  the 
existing  formularies  of  the  English  Church,  which  it  desires  to  make 
the  rule  of  its  proceedings."  ^ 

Amongst  those  who  spoke  in  favour  of  this  amendment, 
in  addition  to  the  mover  and  seconder,  were  Dr.  Pusey  and 
the  Rev.  J.  Keble.  Amongst  those  who  spoke  in  favour  of 
Mr.  Palmer's  motion  was  the  Rev.  G.  A.  Denison,  afterwards 
so  well  known  as  Archdeacon  Denison.  The  objection  to 
signing  a  Declaration  of  faith  "over  and  above  the  existing 
formularies,"  came  with  a  bad  grace  from  those  very  men 
who  signed  Declarations  of  faith  soon  after  "  over  and 
above  the  existing  formularies "  in  defence  of  Baptismal 
Regeneration,  as  against  the  Gorham  judgment.  Two  days 
after  the  Bristol  meeting,  Dr.  Hook  replied  to  an  invitation 
to  join  the  Yorkshire  Church  Union.    He  declined  to  do  so. 

"  I  do  not,"  he  wrote,  "  see  how  members  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land can  be  called  upon  to  form  a  Union,  except  on  the  principles, 
and  in  vindication  of  the  principles,  of  the  English  Reformation. 
Those  principles  are  both  Catholic  and  Protestant — Catholic  as 
opposed  to  the  peculiarities  of  Rationalism,  and  Protestant  as 
opposed  to  the  Medisevalism  of  the  Romanist.  I  do  not  see  how  a 
consistent  High  Churchman  can,  after  what  has  transpired,  join  your 
Union,  unless  you  state  one  of  your  objects  to  be  *  to  maintain  and 
propagate  the  principles  of  the  English  Reformation  ;  to  uphold 
Scriptural  and  primitive  truth  in  opposition  to  mediaeval  heresies  ; 
and  to  preserve  the  middle  position  of  the  Church  of  England  in 
opposition  equally  to  Rationalistic  scepticism  and  Romish  supersti- 
tion.' If  this  were  to  be  one  of  the  avowed  objects  of  your  institu- 
tion, it  would  exclude  Romanisers  as  well  as  all  Rationalists."  ^ 

One  result  of  the  Gorham  judgment  was  seen  this  year 
in  an  organised  attack  on  the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy 

^  English  Churchman,  October  3,  1850,  p.  675. 
2  Ibid.  October  10,  1850,  p.  685. 


THE    BISHOPS    AND    THE    CHURCH    DISCIPLINE    ACT      33 1 

Council  as  the  final  Court  of  Appeal.  It  was  the  desire  of 
the  Puseyites  that  not  only  should  the  Church's  laws  be 
made  by  the  clergy  only,  but  that  they  alone  should  be 
judges  in  ecclesiastical  causes.  Their  wish  was  to  bring 
the  Church  once  more  into  priestly  bondage.  It  is  remark- 
able that  the  Act  of  Parliament  which  made  the  Judicial 
Committee  of  Privy  Council  the  final  Court  of  Appeal  (viz., 
3  &  4  Victoria,  chap.  86),  was  passed  with  the  consent  of 
the  Bishops.  Archbishop  Tait,  on  this  subject,  wrote,  while 
Bishop  of  London  : — 

"  It  is  important  to  observe  that  this  Act  was  framed  with  the 
concurrence  of  the  Bishops.  The  Lord  Chancellor,  in  introducing 
it,  expressed  a  hope  that  it  would  reconcile  all  differences  upon  the 
subject.  The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  on  the  part  of  the  clergy, 
gave  his  cordial  approbation  to  the  Bill ;  the  Bishop  of  Exeter,  also, 
entirely  and  heartily  concurred  in  the  measure.  There  is  no  record 
of  any  debate  upon  the  Bill,  beyond  a  very  few  suggestions  by  inde- 
pendent members  in  either  House  ;  and  the  acquiescence  with  which 
it  was  received  on  all  sides  was  doubtless  owing  to  the  agreement 
of  the  Bishops  in  supporting  the  measure.  It  seems  clear,  therefore, 
that  the  rulers  of  our  Church  at  that  time  saw  no  reason  to  object  to 
the  Judicial  Committee  as  a  Court  of  Appeal  in  matters  of  ecclesiastical 
discipline,  whether  relating  to  faith  or  morals.  It  would  be  a  serious 
reflection  upon  the  character  of  men  like  Archbishop  Howley,  and 
Bishop  Blomfield,  and  Bishop  Kaye,  were  it  to  be  supposed  that 
they  were  ignorant  of  the  nature  of  a  tribunal  which  they  had  them- 
selves assisted  in  founding,  or  that  they  were  careless  of  the  interests 
with  which  they  were  now,  after  trial,  entrusting  it,  or  that  they 
deliberately  sanctioned  an  institution  against  which  any  objection  of 
principle  could  be  raised."  ^ 

During  this  year,  the  Bishop  of  London  introduced  a 
Bill  into  the  House  of  Lords,  which  received  the  assent  of 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  the  object  of  which  was  to 
deprive  the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council  of  its  powers 
as  the  final  Court  of  Appeal,  and  to  transfer  them  to  the 
Upper  House  of  Convocation.  Happily  it  was  defeated  on 
its  second  reading,  on  June  3,  1850,  by  84  to  51,  and  from 
that  day  to  this  the  Judicial  Committee  remains  the  final 
Court  of  Appeal.     It  will  be  a  dark  day  for  Protestantism 

^  Brodrick  and  Freemantle'sy>/^w^;//5  of  the  /udicial  Committee.  Introduc- 
tion by  the  Bishop  of  London,  p.  Ixxi. 


332  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

should  Parliament  ever  make  the  Bishops  the  final  Court  of 
Appeal.  The  opinion  of  Lord  John  Russell  on  this  impor- 
tant subject  was  wise  and  worthy  of  remembrance.  He 
wrote  to  the  Bishop  of  London  on  February  25,  1850  : — 
"What  I  think  essential  to  the  Queen's  Supremacy  is  that  no 
person  should  be  deprived  of  his  rights  unless  by  due  inter- 
pretation of  law.  If  the  Supreme  Court  of  Appeal  in  heresy 
were  formed  solely  of  the  clergy,  their  opinions  would  pro- 
bably be  founded  on  the  prevailing  theological  opinions 
of  the  Judicial  Bishops,  who  might  be  one  day  Calvinistic 
and  the  next  Romish.  Especially  if  three  senior  Bishops 
and  two  Divinity  Professors  were  to  form  part  of  the 
tribunal,  we  might  have  superannuated  Bishops  and  Uni- 
versity intolerance  driving  out  of  the  Church  its  most  dis- 
tinguished ornaments."  ^  It  was  on  this  same  subject  of  a 
final  Court  of  Appeal  that  his  lordship  wrote  the  sentence 
which  I  have  already  cited  : — "  I  fear  that  nothing  but  the 
erection  of  a  priestly  supremacy  over  the  Crown  would  ever 
satisfy  the  party  in  the  Church  who  now  take  the  lead  in 
agitation."^ 

The  Papal  Aggression  led  to  a  great  increase  of  Protes- 
tant opposition  to  Puseyism  throughout  the  country.  By 
this  time  the  Puseyite  clergy  had  made  considerable  pro- 
gress in  the  adoption  of  Ritual  which  had  not  been  seen  in 
English  Churches  since  the  Protestant  Reformation.  Pro- 
tests were  heard  on  every  hand,  and  addresses  to  the  Bishops 
were  multiplied.  Of  these,  the  most  remarkable  was  the 
outcome  of  a  great  Protestant  meeting  held  in  the  Free- 
masons' Hall,  on  December  6,  1850,  over  which  Lord  Ashley 
presided.  An  important  Lay  Address  to  the  Queen  on  the 
subject  of  the  Papal  Aggression  was  presented  to  her 
Majesty,  signed  by  63  Peers,  108  Members  of  Parliament, 
and  321,240  lay  members  of  the  Church  of  England.  In 
this  Address,  an  earnest  protest  was  made  against  the 
Romanising  work  going  on  in  the  Church  of  England. 
From  it  I  give  the  following  extracts  : — 

"  But  we  desire  also  humbly  to  represent  to  your  Majesty  our 
conviction,  confirmed  by  the  recent  testimony  of  several  Bishops  of 

1  Life  of  Lord  John  Russell,  vol.  ii.  p.  Il6,  ''■Ibid.  p.  117. 


LAY    ADDRESS    AGAINST    ROMANISING  333 

our  Church,  that  the  Court  of  Rome  would  never  have  attempted 
such  an  act  of  aggression  had  not  encouragements  been  held  out  to 
that  encroaching  power  by  many  of  the  clergy  of  our  own  Church, 
who  have  for  several  years  past  shown  a  desire  to  assimilate  the 
doctrines  and  services  of  the  Church  of  England  to  those  of  the 
Roman  Communion.  While  we  would  cheerfully  contend  for  the 
principles  of  the  Reformation  against  all  open  enemies,  we  have  to 
lament  that  our  most  dangerous  foes  are  those  of  our  own  household  ; 
and  hence  we  feel  that  it  is  to  little  purpose  to  repel  the  aggressions 
of  the  foreigner,  unless  those  principles  and  practices  which  have 
tempted  him  to  such  aggressions  be  publicly  and  universally  re- 
pudiated. 

"  We  are  conscious  that  the  evils  to  which  we  allude  are  deeply 
seated,  and  have  been  the  growth  of  a  series  of  years,  and  hence  we 
entertain  no  expectation  that  they  can  be  suddenly  eradicated.  But 
we  humbly  entreat  your  Majesty,  in  the  exercise  of  your  Royal 
Prerogative,  to  direct  the  attention  of  the  Primates  and  the  Bishops 
of  the  Church  to  the  necessity  of  using  all  fit  and  proper  means  to 
purify  it  from  the  infection  of  false  doctrine  ;  and,  as  respects  external 
and  visible  observances,  in  which  many  novelties  have  been  intro- 
duced, to  take  care  that  measures  may  be  promptly  adopted  for  the 
repression  of  all  such  practices. 

"  While  we  feel  deeply  conscious  that  the  true  and  effectual 
remedy  for  the  dangers  which  beset  our  Protestant  Church  belongs 
to  no  human  power,  but  only  to  the  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church 
whose  Almighty  aid  is  to  be  sought  by  humble,  persevering  prayer, 
we  are  thankful  that,  by  the  Constitution  and  the  existing  laws,  there 
is  vested  in  your  Majesty,  as  the  Earthly  Head  of  our  Churchy  a 
wholesome  power  of  interposition ;  which  power  we  entreat  your 
Majesty  now  to  exercise.  The  records  of  the  reigns  of  your  Majesty's 
illustrious  predecessors,  both  before  and  since  the  glorious  Revolu- 
tion, furnish  many  examples  of  the  manner  in  which  the  mischiefs 
and  abuses  which  at  various  times  have  sprung  up  in  the  Church 
have  been  dealt  with  by  the  exercise  of  the  Royal  Authority. 

**  That  it  may  please  your  Majesty,  on  a  view  of  the  peculiar 
perils  in  which  our  Protestant  Church  is  now  placed,  to  interpose  for 
its  defence,  is  our  humble  petition." 

A  record  of  some  of  the  instances,  referred  to  in  this 
petition,  in  which  evils  in  the  Church  have  been  dealt  with 
by  the  exercise  of  the  Royal  Prerogative,  may  be  read  in 
Cardwell's  Documentary  Annals  of  the  Reformed  Church  of 
England.     It  gave  great  pleasure  to  those  who  signed  this 


334  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

petition  to  the  Queen  to  find  that  it  had  been  acted  on  by 
her  Majesty.  By  her  command  a  copy  was  sent  to  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  to  be  by  him  communicated  to 
the  Archbishop  of  York  and  the  Bishops,  with  a  request  that 
they  would  do  all  in  their  power  to  prevent  innovations. 
Sir  George  Grey's  letter,  conveying  the  Royal  commands  to 
the  Archbishop,  is  important,  not  only  for  what  it  contains, 
but  as  a  possible  precedent  in  the  not  distant  future.  It 
was  as  follows  : — 

"Whitehall,  isl April,  1851. 

"My  Lord  Archbishop, — I  have  received  the  Queen's  com- 
mands to  transmit  to  your  Grace  the  accompanying  Address,  which 
has  been  presented  to  her  Majesty,  signed  by  a  very  large  number 
of  lay  members  of  the  United  Church  of  England  and  Ireland, 
including  many  Members  of  both  Houses  of  Parliament. 

"  Her  Majesty  places  full  confidence  in  your  Grace's  desire  to 
use  such  means  as  are  within  your  power  to  maintain  the  purity  of 
the  doctrines  taught  by  the  clergy  of  the  Established  Church,  and 
to  discourage  and  prevent  innovations  in  the  mode  of  conducting 
the  services  of  the  Church  not  sanctioned  by  law  or  general  usage, 
and  calculated  to  create  dissatisfaction  and  alarm  among  a  numerous 
body  of  its  members. 

"  I  am,  therefore,  commanded  to  place  ihis  Address  in  your 
Grace's  hands,  and  to  request  that  it  may  be  communicated  to  the 
Archbishop  of  York  and  to  the  Suffragan  Bishops  in  England  and 
Wales,  who,  her  Majesty  does  not  doubt,  will  concur  with  your 
Grace  in  the  endeavour,  by  a  judicious  exercise  of  their  authority 
and  influence,  to  uphold  the  purity  and  simplicity  of  the  Faith  and 
Worship  of  our  Reformed  Church,  and  to  reconcile  differences 
among  its  members  injurious  to  its  peace  and  usefulness. — I  have 
the  honour  to  be,  my  Lord  Archbishop,  your  Grace's  obedient 
servant,  G.  Grey. 

"His  Grace  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury." 

On  March  19,  185 1,  Lord  Ashley  presented  an  address 
to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  signed  by  239,860  clerical 
and  lay  members  of  the  Church  of  England,  stating  that 
the  Papal  Aggression  had  been  "  invited,  encouraged,  and 
facilitated"  by  the  state  of  things  in  the  English  Church 
produced  by  Tractarianism,  and  calling  upon  the  Bishops 
to  give  "the  desired  relief."     The  Archbishop,  in  his  reply, 


AN    EPISCOPAL    MANIFESTO  335 

said  : — "  It  will  be  vain  to  deny  what  our  adversaries  have 
themselves  avowed,  that  the  aggressive  measures  on  the 
part  of  Rome,  against  which  this  country  is  protesting, 
have  been  encouraged  by  symptoms  of  approach  towards 
Romish  doctrines  and  Romish  usages  which  have  appeared 
of  late  years  within  the  Church  of  England.  It  is  also 
certain  that  the  principles  which  have  been  loudly  main- 
tained and  zealously  propagated,  under  the  equivocal  title 
of  Church  principles,  have  a  tendency  to  lead  those  who 
embrace  them  to  reconciliation  with  the  Church  of  Rome, 
as  the  Church  in  which  those  principles  are  most  perfectly 
carried  out  and  established."^  In  conclusion,  his  Grace 
promised,  on  behalf  of  the  Episcopal  Bench,  that  they 
would  do  their  duty  in  preventing  practices  and  innovations 
in  public  worship,  which  had  their  origin  in  error  and 
superstition.  I  have  no  doubt  that  his  Grace  meant  all 
that  he  said,  but,  alas  !  the  Protestant  petitioners  looked  to 
the  Bishops  in  vain  for  any  effectual  remedy  for  the  evils 
of  which  they  complained.  And  so  it  has  been  ever  since 
to  the  present  day.  There  have  been  some  noble  exceptions 
to  the  general  rule  with  regard  to  the  attitude  of  the  Bishops 
in  their  own  dioceses,  but  taking  the  Episcopal  Bench  as  a 
whole  they  have  lamentably  failed  in  their  duty.  We  have 
had  plenty  of  words,  and  many  promises,  but  for  all  this, 
little  or  nothing  has  been  done  to  satisfy  the  just  demands 
of  the  loyal  and  aggrieved  laity.  What  was  the  immediate 
result  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury's  promise  of  Epis- 
copal action  in  1851  ?  Scarcely  anything  but  an  Episcopal 
Manifesto,  which,  however,  was  not  signed  by  the  Bishops 
of  Bath  and  Wells,  Exeter,  Manchester,  and  Hereford. 
It  was  about  as  mild  and  harmless  a  document  as  could 
well  be  imagined.  It  was  simply  an  exhortation  to  the 
clergy  to  make  no  innovations  in  Divine  Service  which 
should  give  offence  to  the  congregation,  even  if  legal ;  and 
to  do  nothing  contrary  to  the  law  of  the  Church.  They 
did,  how^ever,  denounce  the  principle  which  had  been  laid 
down  by  some  of  the  clergy,  that  "  whatever  form  or  usage 
existed  in  the  Church  before  the  Reformation  may  now  be 

^  Guardian,  March  22,  1851,  p.  212. 


336  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

freely  introduced  and  observed,  unless  there  can  be  alleged 
against  it  the  distinct  letter  of  some  formal  prohibition." 
As  to  this  principle  their  lordships  declared  that : — "  It  is 
manifest  that  a  licence  such  as  is  contended  for  is  wholly 
incompatible  with  any  uniformity  of  worship  whatsoever, 
and  at  variance  with  the  universal  practice  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  which  has  never  given  to  the  officiating  Ministers 
of  separate  congregations  any  such  large  discretion  in  the 
selection  of  ritual  observances."^  From  this  document  it 
is  evident  that  the  overwhelming  majority  of  the  Bishops 
of  that  day  accepted  the  principle  that  "omission  is  pro- 
hibition." 

Later  on  in  the  year,  another  Declaration  was  signed  by 
no  fewer  than  3262  clergymen,  including  seven  Deans  and 
twelve  Archdeacons,  in  favour  of  the  Royal  Supremacy,  and 
expressing  approval  of  the  judgment  of  the  Judicial  Com- 
mittee of  Privy  Council  in  the  Gorham  case.  It  was  for- 
warded to  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  and  York.  Those 
who  signed  it  declared  that  they  felt  called  upon  "  under 
present  circumstances  (whether  holding  or  not  the  view 
which  called  forth  the  judgment)  humbly  to  state  our  con- 
viction that  it  was  a  wise  and  just  sentence,  in  accordance 
with  the  principles  of  the  Church  of  England.  And  we  re- 
spectfully, but  firmly,  protest  against  any  attempt,  from 
whatever  quarter  it  may  proceed,  to  bring  into  contempt  a 
judgment  so  issued  ;  and  to  charge  with  false  teaching,  and 
discredit  with  their  flocks,  those  whose  doctrine  has  been 
pronounced  by  that  judgment  to  be  '  not  contrary  or  repug- 
nant to  the  declared  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England.' 
And  we  respectfully,  but  firmly,  protest  against  any  attempt, 
from  whatever  quarter  it  may  proceed,  to  bring  into  con- 
tempt a  judgment  so  issued."  Amongst  those  who  signed 
this  very  proper  declaration,  was  the  Very  Rev.  A.  C.  Tait, 
Dean  of  Carlisle,  and  afterwards  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 
From  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  a  reply  to  the  Declara- 
tion was  received,  expressing  "  much  satisfaction  "  at  receiv- 
ing it,  while  from  the  Archbishop  of  York  a  letter  was 
received  expressing  approval  of  the  Declaration.^ 

^  Guardian,  April  2,  1851,  p.  251.  2  /^/^^_  January  14,  1852,  p   28. 


A    PLYMOUTH    CONFESSIONAL    CASE  337 

A  great  deal  of  excitement  was  created  in  Plymouth 
during  the  year  1852,  in  connection  with  some  Confes- 
sional scandals  alleged  to  have  taken  place  at  St.  Peter's 
Church  in  that  city.  The  Bishop  of  Exeter  was  asked  to 
hold  a  judicial  inquiry  on  oath  as  to  the  alleged  facts,  but 
he  declined  to  do  so.  In  the  month  of  September,  however, 
he  held  an  inquiry  into  the  case  at  the  Royal  Hotel,  Ply- 
mouth, but  refused  to  consider  it  as  judicial,  nor  would  he 
consent  to  grant  the  urgent  entreaties  of  the  Protestant  ac- 
cusers of  the  Vicar  of  St.  Peter's,  that  the  witnesses  should  be 
sworn  before  giving  their  evidence.  The  principal  charge 
against  the  Vicar  was  that  of  hearing  the  Confessions  of 
young  girls  from  the  institutions  of  Miss  Sellon's  Sisters  of 
Mercy,  and  then  asking  them  indecent  questions.  During 
the  inqiiiry  a  letter  was  read  from  Miss  Sellon,  the  Mother 
Superior  of  the  Sisterhood,  denying  that  any  of  the  girls 
under  the  care  of  the  Sisters  were  "  in  anywise  compelled  or 
constrained  to  confess,"  but  admitting  that  they  were  allowed 
to  go  "of  free  choice  "  ;  and  that  "  it  is  our  constant  practice 
to  advise  them  to  see  their  Minister,  either  for  this  pur- 
pose [Confession],  or  for  receiving  such  higher  counsel  and 
spiritual  aid  as  it  is  not  ours  to  give  them,  for  their  soul's 
good."  ^  The  principal  witness  examined  was  a  girl  whose 
character,  as  it  appeared  at  the  inquiry,  was  far  from  satis- 
factory, nor  would  it,  I  think,  have  been  right  to  have  con- 
demned the  Vicar  on  such  evidence,  more  especially  as  he 
appeared  personally  before  the  Bishop  and  in  the  most 
solemn  manner  denied  that  he  had  ever  even  so  much  as 
received  the  girl  to  Confession  at  all,  much  less  put  disgust- 
ing questions  to  her.  There  were  other  cases  to  be  brought 
against  the  Vicar,  and  it  was  certainly  unfortunate,  for  both 
parties,  that  time  was  not  allowed  to  bring  them  forward. 
In  the  result,  the  Bishop  entirely  acquitted  the  Vicar  as  to 
the  whole  of  the  charges  brought  against  him,  and  declared 
that  he  was  free,  not  merely  from  blame,  but  ''  even  of 
indiscretion  in  receiving  the  Confessions  made  to  him." 
There  was,  however,  a  remarkable  letter  from  the  accused 
Vicar  to  the  Bishop,  which  was  read  at  the  inquiry,  which 
contained    a   startling    statement   worthy    of    notice   heie 

'  Cvardian^  September  29,  1852,  p.  647. 

Y 


338  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Referring  therein  to  his  practice  in  the  Confessional — he  in 
no  way  denied  that  he  heard  Confessions — he  declared  : — 
"  On  the  Seventh  Commandment  I  trust  I  have  been  most 
cautious  not  to  suggest  evil  to  the  penitent,  but  judicious 
questions."  ^  This  was  a  frank  acknowledgment  that,  in 
some  cases,  he  asked  questions  about  the  Seventh  Com- 
mandment— one  of  the  most  objectionable  features  of  the 
Confessional  to  an  enlightened  Protestant  mind.  If  a  girl 
has  a  trouble  on  this  subject  it  would  be  far  wiser,  and  more 
modest,  to  consult  one  of  her  own  sex  for  advice.  Later 
on  in  the  year  Dr.  Pusey  wrote  to  this  same  Vicar  that  : — 
"  It  is  (as  you  know),  a  mere  dream,  that  any  father,  mother, 
husband,  .wife,  or  child,  would  be  pained  by  any  question 
we  put  in  Confession,  apart  from  the  pain  that  sins  have 
been  committed."  ^  In  reply  to  this  very  bold  statement, 
it  may  be  sufficient  to  ask  any  husband  or  father  reading 
these  pages — Would  you  like  your  wife  or  daughter  ques- 
tioned in  the  Confessional  as  to  sins  of  word,  thought,  and 
deed  against  the  Seventh  Commandment  ?  You  would,  in 
such  a  case,  be  something  more  than  "pained";  you  would 
be  highly  and  justly  indignant,  if  a  wife  or  daughter  of  yours 
had  been  thus  subjected  to  the  indecent  talk  of  a  Father  Con- 
fessor, who  might  be  far  from  immaculate.  The  whole  thing 
is  disgusting  and  intolerable.  I  should  be  sorry  to  accuse 
Rituahstic  Confessors  generally  of  doing  this  sort  of  dirty 
work  from  evil  motives  ;  but  it  is  dirty  work  none  the  less, 
whose  natural  tendency  is  to  corrupt  both  priest  and  peni- 
tent. God,  the  Holy  Ghost,  in  his  Word,  exhorts  us  con- 
cerning sin  against  this  commandment  : — "Let  it  not  be  once 
named  among  you,  as  becometh  saints  "  ;  and  I  am  not 
aware  that  any  exception  is  given  in  favour  of  a  Father  Con- 
fessor— an  official  wholly  unknown  in  the  New  Testament. 
A  very  important  event  took  place  on  November  12, 
1852,  when  the  Convocation  of  Canterbury  met  for  the 
despatch  of  business,  for  the  first  time  in  135  years.  A 
persistent  agitation  for  freedom  to  transact  business  had 
gone  on  for  several  years,  and  a  "  Society  for  the  Revival 
of  Convocation "   had   been  formed  in  the  previous  year. 

1   Gtmrdian,  September  29,  1852,  p.  647.       _*  Ibid.  November  24,  1852,  p.  788. 


REVIVAL    OF    CONVOCATION  339 

The  founders  of  this  Society,  some  time  before  its  forma- 
tion, endeavoured  in  vain  to  secure  the  adhesion  of  the 
National  Ckib  to  an  address  to  the  Queen  in  favour  of  the 
revival  of  Convocation.  This  Club,  I  may  here  remark, 
was  formed  in  1845  for  promoting  the  cause  of  Protestant- 
ism in  the  Established  Church,  and  is  still  in  existence  with 
a  very  large  number  of  members.  The  movement  for  the 
Revival  of  Convocation  was  mainly  conducted  by  High 
Churchmen,  and  was  not  fully  successful  until  March  20, 
1861,  when  the  Convocation  of  York  also  met  for  the  transac- 
tion of  business.  And  now,  after  nearly  forty  years,  we  are 
met  face  to  face  with  an  agitation,  not  for  the  Revival,  but  for 
the  Reform  of  Convocation,  and  a  Bill  has  been  prepared 
to  enable  it  to  reform  itself.  Unfortunately,  there  are  so 
many  Romanisers  in  Convocation  that  Protestant  Church- 
men cannot  safely  entrust  them  with  such  an  important 
task,  nor  should  any  reform  be  considered  satisfactory 
which  does  not  give  to  the  laity  an  adequate  representa- 
tion, with  a  voice  on  all  questions,  whether  matters  of 
doctrine  or  discipline.  But  this  is  what  the  extreme 
Ritualists  will  never,  if  they  can  help  it,  permit  the  present 
Convocations  to  accept,  and  to  allow  the  Convocations  of 
Canterbury  and  York  to  become  a  real  Parliament  of  the 
Church,  without  granting  to  the  laity  even  as  much  power 
as  they  already  possess  in  the  Established  Church  of  Scot- 
land, would  be  to  place  the  Church  of  England  under 
sacerdotal  bondage  as  real  as  that  from  which  our  fore- 
fathers escaped  at  the  Protestant  Reformation. 

During  the  years  1853  and  1854  not  many  events  of 
great  importance  took  place  in  the  History  of  the  Rome- 
ward  Movement,  with  the  exception  of  the  prosecution  of 
Archdeacon  Denison  for  false  doctrine,  and  the  first  steps 
in  the  case  of  Wester to}i  v.  Liddell.  Yet  during  this  period 
the  Ritualists  were  by  no  means  asleep  or  idle.  They  were 
quietly  pushing  their  way  into  many  a  hitherto  peaceful 
parish,  causing  in  numerous  instances  heartburns,  dissen- 
sion, and  frequently  energetic  opposition.  "Altar  Lights" 
were  slowly  introduced,  and  the  way  prepared  for  the 
use  of  the  Romish  vestments.     Occasionally  notes  of  de- 


34°  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

fiance  were  heard  from  the  Puseyite  camp.  The  Rev. 
James  Skinner,  Senior  Curate  of  St.  Barnabas',  wrote  to 
the  Times  challenging  a  prosecution.  "The  worship  of 
St.  Barnabas',"  he  said,  "is  the  worship  of  the  Church  of 
England.  We  challenge  this  issue  in  the  Courts  of  the 
Church  of  England,  if  any  such  there  be.  If  it  is  not  the 
worship  of  the  Church  of  England,  the  sooner  it  is  put 
down  the  better."  ^  We  do  not  hear  challenges  like  this 
in  the  year  1900.  The  Ritualists  now  dread  nothing  so 
much  as  prosecutions.  A  brother  Curate  of  Mr.  Skinner's 
at  St.  Barnabas',  the  well-known  Rev.  Charles  Lowder, 
when  opposition  again  arose  in  that  parish,  in  1854,  was 
of  a  somewhat  militant  nature.  A  placard  was  being 
carried  one  day,  about  the  parish,  urging  people  to  "Vote 
for  Westerton,"  the  Protestant  Churchwarden,  which  greatly 
angered  a  youthful  cousin  of  Mr.  Lowder.  "  Charles," 
says  his  biographer,  "bade  him  not  to  throw  dirt  or  stones, 
but  gave  the  boys  sixpence  to  buy  rotten  eggs.  They  were 
not  slow  in  using  them,  carrying  the  war  into  Ebury  Street, 
and  the  bespattered  'sandwich'  complained  to  his  em- 
ployers, who  speedily  invoked  the  aid  of  the  law  against 
the  assailants.  Charles  [Lowder]  was  interrogated,  and 
took  all  the  blame  of  inciting  the  boys  to  bedaub  the 
inscription.  Before  the  police  magistrate  he  repeated 
publicly  the  admission  of  indiscretion  and  sorrow  for  it, 
which  he  had  already  made  privately,  and  the  case  was 
dismissed,  with  more  than  acquiescence  on  the  part  of 
the  prosecution."  But  the  Bishop  of  London  did  not  let 
Mr.  Lowder  off  so  easily,  for  he  suspended  him  from  his 
duties  as  Curate  for  six  weeks,  as  a  punishment  for  his 
offence,  which  he  subsequently  mitigated  at  the  request 
of  the  Vicar,  the  Hon.  and  Rev.  R.  Liddell,  who  had 
succeeded  to  the  Rev.  W.  J.  E.  Bennett,  then  Vicar  of 
Frome.  The  latter  gentleman  wrote  to  Mr.  Lowder  in 
his  trouble  : — "  I  have  no  doubt  I  myself  have  done,  or 
might  have  done,  a  similar  thing."  ^ 

In  the  month  of  January  1853  a  controversy  arose  be- 
tween Bishop  Spencer  (late  of  Madras),  Assistant-Bishop  to 

1  Charles  Lowder :  A  Biography,  ist  edition,  p.  49. 

2  Ibid.  pp.  57-60. 


THE    POWER    OF    EXAMINING    CHAPLAINS  341 

the  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells,  and  the  Rev.  G.  A.  Denison, 
Archdeacon  of  Taunton,  and  Examining  Chaplain  to  the 
Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells.  It  arose  in  this  way.  A  young 
Deacon,  the  Rev.  William  F.  Fisher,  wrote  to  Bishop 
Spencer  to  inform  him  that  Archdeacon  Denison  had  re- 
fused to  present  him  for  priest's  orders  at  his  lordship's  next 
Ordination,  on  the  ground  that  he  held  views  as  to  the 
Lord's  Supper,  which,  in  the  Archdeacon's  opinion,  were 
erroneous.  To  this  the  Bishop  replied,  giving  at  some 
length  his  own  views  as  to  the  Real  Presence,  which  were 
decidedly  Protestant,  and  then  he  wrote  to  the  Archdeacon 
on  the  subject.  After  reminding  him  of  an  interview  he 
had  had  with  him  on  April  15th,  Dr.  Spencer  proceeded  to 
say  that  : — "  It  would  be  highly  dishonest  and  improper  on 
my  part  to  ordain  a  candidate  holding  such  an  opinion  " 
as  that  of  Archdeacon  Denison's.  The  latter  gentleman 
replied,  giving  an  outline  of  his  doctrine  : — 

"  To  you,  as  a  kind  friend  and  a  Bishop  of  the  Church,  I  am 
ready  to  state,  that  I  hold  the  doctrine  of  the  '  Real  Presence,'  as 
taught  and  declared  by  the  Church  of  England,  to  be  this  : — First, 
Negatii'ely. — That  there  is  not  a  corporal  presence  of  the  Body  and 
Blood  of  Christ  in  the  Sacramental  Bread  and  Wine;  that  the 
Sacramental  Bread  and  Wine  remain  still  in  their  very  natural  sub- 
stances, and  therefore  may  not  be  adored. 

"  Secondly,  Affirmatively. — That  there  is  a  Real  Presence  of  the 
Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  in  the  Sacramental  Bread  and  Wine,  in  a 
manner  which,  as  Holy  Scripture  has  not  explained,  the  Church  has 
not  defined.  That  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ,  being  really  pre- 
sent in  the  Sacramental  Bread  and  Wine,  are  given  in  and  by  the 
outward  sign  to  all,  and  are  received  by  all."^ 

Bishop  Spencer,  of  course,  was  not  satisfied  with  this 
explanation,  which  was  followed  by  an  intimation  from  the 
Archdeacon  that  if  the  Bishop  attempted  to  counter-exam- 
ine any  of  the  candidates  at  the  forthcoming  ordination,  he 
should  "  most  positively  "  decline  to  have  anything  to  do  with 
the  presentation  of  any  of  the  candidates.  The  result  was 
that  Bishop  Spencer  resigned  his  commission  as  Episcopal 
Assistant  to  Bishop  Bagot,  and  soon  after  Archdeacon 
Denison  resigned  the  office  of  Examining  Chaplain.    When 

^  A  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Bath  and  IVells.     By  Bishop  Spencer,  pp.  20,  21. 
London  :  Rivington.    1853. 


342  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

writing  his  autobiography,  the  Archdeacon  declared  that 
the  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells  was  in  error  in  supposing 
that  he  had  imposed,  "  of  my  own  authority,"  his  doctrine 
of  the  Real  Presence  on  the  candidates  for  Holy  Orders.^ 
This  was  not  an  absolute,  but  a  qualified  denial  of  the 
charge.  He  admits  that  he  did  impose  his  doctrine  as  to 
Baptismal  Regeneration  on  all  the  candidates,  refusing  to 
pass  those  who  did  not  accept  it.  In  conduct  like  this  we 
discover  one  of  the  reasons  why  there  are  so  few  Evangelical 
candidates  for  the  Ministry  at  the  present  time.  It  is  no 
easy  matter,  in  some  cases,  for  an  Evangelical  of  decided 
views  to  pass  an  examination  at  the  hands  of  men  who 
are  advanced  Romanisers,  as,  unfortunately,  several  Ex- 
amining Chaplains  are. 

Soon  after  these  events,  Archdeacon  Denison  preached 
in  Wells  Cathedral  three  sermons  on  the  Real  Presence, 
which  led  to  legal  proceedings  being  taken  against  him  for 
false  doctrine.  They  were  preached  respectively  on  August 
7,  1853,  November  6,  1853,  and  May  14,  1854.  The  pro- 
secutor was  the  Rev.  Joseph  Ditcher,  Vicar  of  South  Brent, 
Somerset.  These  sermons  were  subsequently  published 
by  the  Archdeacon.  As  the  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells  was 
patron  of  the  living  of  East  Brent,  of  which  the  Archdeacon 
was  Vicar,  it  was  necessary  to  apply  to  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury  to  issue  a  Commission  of  Inquiry.  On  Novem- 
ber 3,  1854,  his  Grace  served  on  the  defendant  a  formal 
notice  that  the  Commission  would  shortly  be  appointed, 
but  it  did  not  meet  until  January  3,  1855,  when  the  proceed- 
ings lasted  four  days.  On  January  loth,  the  Commissioners 
reported  that  there  were  prima  facie  grounds  for  proceed- 
ing. In  the  unanimous  opinion  of  the  Commissioners  : — 
"The  proposition  of  the  Venerable  the  Archdeacon,  'that 
to  all  who  come  to  the  Lord's  Table,  to  those  who  eat  and 
drink  worthily,  and  to  those  who  eat  and  drink  unworthily, 
the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  are  given,  and  that  by  all 
who  come  to  the  Lord's  Table,  by  those  who  eat  and  drink 
worthily,  and  by  those  who  eat  and  drink  unworthily,  the 
Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  are  received,'  is  directly  contrary 
or  repugnant  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England, 

■'  Archdeacon  Denison's  N'otes  of  My  Life,  p.  230. 


THE    DENISON    CASE  343 

and  especially  to  the  Articles  of  Religion,  and  that  the  doc- 
trines set  forth  in  the  aforesaid  sermons,  with  reference  to 
the  Real  Presence  in  the  Holy  Eucharist,  are  unsupported 
by  the  Articles  taken  in  their  literal  and  grammatical  sense, 
are  contrary  to  the  doctrines  and  teaching  of  the  Church  of 
England,  and  have  a  very  dangerous  tendency."  ^  The 
passage  from  the  Archdeacon's  sermon  thus  selected  for 
condemnation  is  found  in  the  first  of  the  three  sermons 
objected  against.^ 

After  the  finding  of  the  Commissioners,  several  legal 
difficulties  arose  in  the  way  of  proceeding  with  the  case, 
but  eventually  these  were  overcome.  The  case  was  argued 
on  its  merits  at  the  Guildhall,  Bath,  on  July  22,  1856,  and 
the  five  following  days,  before  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, Dr.  Lushington,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Heurtley  (Margaret 
Professor  of  Divinity  at  Oxford),  and  the  Dean  of  Wells. 
After  the  hearing  the  Court  adjourned,  and  on  August  12th 
Dr.  Lushington  delivered  an  interlocutory  judgment  con- 
demning the  Archdeacon,  but  allowing  him  time  until 
October  ist  to  revoke  his  errors.  As  this  judgment  was 
subsequently  confirmed  by  the  Court,  it  is  important  to  give 
here  the  following  extract  from  it,  condemning  Archdeacon 
Denison's  doctrine  on  the  Real  Presence:  — 

"Whereas  it  is  laid  in  the  said  ninth  article  filed  in  this  pro- 
ceeding, that  the  said  Archdeacon,  in  a  sermon  preached  by  him 
in  the  Cathedral  Church  of  Wells,  on  or  about  Sunday,  August  7, 
1853,  ^^^  advisedly  maintain  and  affirm  doctrines  directly  contrary 
and  repugnant  to  the  25th,  28th,  and  29th  Articles  of  Religion,  re- 
ferred to  in  the  statute  of  13  Eliz.,  c.  12,  or  some  or  one  of  them. 
Among  other  things,  did  therein  advise,  maintain,  and  affirm, 
'  That  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ,  being  really  present  after  an 
immaterial  and  spiritual  manner  in  the  consecrated  Bread  and  Wine, 
are  therein  and  thereby  given  to  all,  and  are  received  by  all  who 
come  to  the  Lord's  Table  ' ;  ^  and  '  That  to  all  who  come  to  the 
Lord's  Table,  to  those  who  eat  and  drink  worthily  and  to  those  who 
eat  and  drink  unworthily,  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  are  given ; 
and  that  by  all  who  come  to  the  Lord's  Table,  by  those  who  eat  and 

^   Guard/an,  January  17,  1855,  p.  57. 

2  T/ie  Real  Presence.     A  Sermon  Preached  on  August  7,  1853.     By  George 
A.  Denison,  Archdeacon  of  Taunton,  p.  20.     London  :  Masters.     1853. 
^  =*  Ibid.  p.  18. 


344  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

drink  worthily  and  by  those  who  eat  and  drink  unworthily,  the  Body 
and  Blood  of  Christ  are  received' — his  Grace,  with  the  assistance 
and  unanimous  concurrence  of  his  Assessors,  has  determined  that 
the  doctrine  in  the  said  passages  is  directly  contrary  and  repugnant 
to  the  28th  and  29th  of  the  said  Articles  of  Religion  and  the  various 
statutes  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  and  that  the  construction  put  upon  the 
said  Articles  of  Religion  by  the  Venerable  the  Archdeacon  of 
Taunton,  viz.,  that  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  become  so  joined 
to  and  become  so  present  in  the  Consecrated  Elements  by  the  act  of 
consecration,  that  the  unworthy  receivers  receive  in  the  elements  the 
Body  and  Blood  of  Christ,  is  not  the  true,  nor  an  admissible  con- 
struction of  the  said  Articles  of  Religion  ;  that  such  doctrines  are 
directly  contrary  and  repugnant  to  the  28th  and  29th  Articles,  and 
that  the  true  and  legal  exposition  of  the  said  Articles  is,  That  the 
Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  are  taken  and  received  by  the  worthy 
receivers  only,  who,  in  taking  and  receiving  the  same  by  faith,  do 
spiritually  eat  the  Flesh  of  Christ  and  drink  the  Blood  of  Christ ; 
whilst  the  wicked  and  unworthy,  by  eating  the  bread  and  drinking 
the  wine  without  faith,  do  not  in  anywise  eat,  take,  or  receive  the 
Body  and  Blood  of  Christ,  being  void  of  faith,  whereby  only  the 
Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  can  be  taken,  eaten,  and  received.  .  .  . 

"Whereas  it  is  pleaded  in  the  said  14th  article  filed  in  these 
proceedings,  that  divers  printed  copies  of  the  sermons  or  discourses, 
in  the  12th  article  mentioned  as  written  or  printed,  or  caused  to 
be  printed,  by  the  said  Archdeacon,  were,  by  his  order  and  direction, 
sold  and  distributed,  in  the  years  1853  and  1854,  within  the  said 
diocese  of  Bath  and  Wells;  and  whereas  the  said  sermon  or  dis- 
course contains  the  following  amongst  other  passages  :  '  And  to  all 
who  come  to  the  Lord's  Table,  to  those  who  eat  and  drink  worthily, 
and  to  those  who  eat  and  drink  unworthily,  the  Body  and  Blood  of 
Christ  are  given  ;  and  that  by  all  who  come  to  the  Lord's  Table,  by 
those  who  eat  and  drink  worthily,  and  by  those  who  eat  and  drink 
unworthily,  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  are  received  ' ;  and  '  It  is 
not  true  that  the  consecrated  bread  and  wine  are  changed  in  their 
natural  substance,  for  they  remain  in  their  very  natural  substance, 
and  therefore  may  not  be  adored.  It  is  true  that  worship  is  due  to 
the  Real,  though  invisible  and  supernatural  presence  of  the  Body 
and  Blood  of  Christ  in  the  Eucharist,  under  the  form  of  Bread 
and  Wine' — his  Grace,  with  the  assistance  of  his  Assessors,  has 
determined  that  the  doctrines  of  the  said  passages  are  directly 
contrary  and  repugnant  to  the  28th  and  29th  of  the  said  Articles  of 
Religion  mentioned  in  the  various  statutes  of  Queen  Elizabeth."  ^ 

'  Guardiati,  August  13,  1856,  pp.  649,  650. 


JUDGMENT    IN    THE    DENISON    CASE  345 

On  October  22,  1856,  the  Court  again  met,  when  the 
Archdeacon  was  called  upon  to  retract  his  errors.  He 
deHvered  a  paper  of  explanations,  which  the  Court  con- 
sidered a  mere  reiteration  of  his  offence,  after  which  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury's  judgment  was  read  by  the 
Registrar,  confirming  and  approving  the  interlocutory 
judgment  of  August  12,  and  concluding  as  follows  : — 

"  Having  maturely  deliberated  upon  the  proceedings  had  therein, 
and  the  offence  proved,  exacting  by  law  deprivation  of  ecclesiastical 
promotion,  [we]  have  thought  fit  to  pronounce,  and  do  accordingly 
pronounce,  decree,  and  declare,  that  the  said  Venerable  George 
Anthony  Denison,  by  reason  of  the  premises,  ought  by  law  to  be 
deprived  of  his  ecclesiastical  promotions,  and  especially  of  the 
said  Archdeaconry  of  Taunton,  and  of  the  said  Vicarage  and  Parish 
Church  of  East  Brent,  in  the  county  of  Somerset,  Diocese  of  Bath 
and  Wells,  and  Province  of  Canterbury,  and  all  profits  and  benefit 
of  the  said  Archdeaconry,  and  of  the  said  Vicarage  and  Parish 
Church,  and  of  and  from  all  and  singular  the  fruits,  tithes,  rents, 
salaries,  and  other  ecclesiastical  dues,  rights,  and  emoluments 
whatsoever,  belonging  and  appertaining  to  the  said  Archdeaconry, 
and  to  the  said  Vicarage  and  Parish  Church ;  and  we  do  deprive 
him  thereof  accordingly  by  this  our  definite  sentence  or  final  decree, 
which  we  read  and  promulgate  by  these  presents."  ^ 

The  Archdeacon  at  once  gave  notice  of  appeal  against 
this  judgment,  and  bitterly  complained  afterwards  that  the 
Court  did  not  give  him  credit  for  his  assertion,  in  his 
sermons,  that  he  taught  that  while  in  Communion  the  good 
and  wicked  eat  the  same  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ,  the 
one  eats  it  to  his  salvation,  while  the  other  eats  it  to  his 
damnation.  But  surely  this  statement  in  no  way  affected 
the  charge  brought  against  him,  which  had  nothing  to  do 
with  the  results  of  eating,  but  with  the  reality  of  what  is 
eaten.  And  so  the  Archdeacon  appealed  to  the  Arches 
Court,  but  when  the  case  came  before  that  Court,  on 
April  20,  1857,  it  was  found  that  it  was  not  an  appeal  on 
the  merits  of  the  case,  but  an  attempt  to  evade  punishment 
by  raising  a  side  issue.  It  was  pleaded  by  the  Counsel  for 
Archdeacon  Denison  that  all  the  proceedings  in  the  case 
were  null  and  void,  because  more  than  two  years  had  elapsed 

^  Guardian,  October  29,  1856,  p.  840. 


346  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

between  the  commission  of  the  last  alleged  offence,  and 
the  citation  to  appear  before  the  Archbishop  at  Bath, 
contrary  to  the  Act  under  which  the  prosecution  was  under- 
taken. On  April  23,  1857,  the  Dean  of  Arches  gave  judgment 
in  favour  of  the  Archdeacon.  Mr.  Ditcher,  the  prose- 
cutor, appealed  to  the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council, 
which  gave  its  judgment  on  February  6,  1858,  dismissing 
the  appeal,  but  carefully  guarding  itself  by  the  state- 
ment : — "  Of  course  it  is  understood  that  upon  the  question 
of  heterodoxy,  the  question  whether  the  respondent  [Arch- 
deacon Denison]  has  at  any  time  uttered  heretical  doctrine 
or  committed  any  ecclesiastical  oflfence,  their  lordships 
have  intimated  no  opinion."  ^ 

The  Archdeacon  was  afraid  to  make  an  appeal  on  the 
merits  of  the  case,  and  therefore  the  judgment  of  the 
Court  at  Bath  still  remains  an  unrefuted  exposition  of  the 
law  of  the  Church  of  England,  which  has  in  no  way  been 
upset  by  the  Bennett  judgment.  Indeed,  the  Archdeacon, 
m  later  life,  seems  to  have  held  the  Bennett  judgment  in 
as  great  contempt  as  the  Archbishop's  judgment  at  Bath. 
"The  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council,"  he  said,  "has 
done'  what  it  could,  first  in  the  Gorham  case,  then  in  the 
Bennett  case,  to  ruin  the  teaching  of  the  Doctrine  of  the 
Sacraments."  -  And  what,  it  may  be  asked,  were  the 
Archdeacon's  reasons  for  not  appealing,  on  the  merits  of 
the  case,  from  the  Archbishop's  judgment  at  Bath,  depriving 
him  of  his  living,  as  a  teacher  of  doctrine  condemned  by 
the  Church  whose  bread  he  ate.?     He  writes  : — 

"  I  despised  throughout  the  imputation  that  I  was  shielding 
myself  under  '  legal  objections,'  when,  if  I  had  been  an  honest 
man,  I  ought  to  have  waived  all  such  things  and  gone  at  once  to 
'  the  merits.'  I  despised  the  imputation  as  dishonest :  I  laughed 
at  it  as  ridiculous.  If  there  had  been  so  much  as  the  shadow  of 
a  shade  of  a  decently  fair  tribunal,  rather  I  should  say,  if  there 
had  been  any  tribunal  in  England  recognised  by  the  constitution 
in  Church  and  State  as  competent  to  pronounce  in  matter  of 
Doctrine  (the  same  has  to  be  said  now  [in  1878]  in  respect  of 
matter  of  Worship),  I  might  possibly  have  considered  about  taking 

^  Brodrick  and  Yxt&vaz.Vi\.\€%  judgments  of  the  Privy  Council,  p.  175. 
2  Denison's  Notes  of  My  Life,  p.  192. 


PUSEYITE    REBELLION    AGAINST    THE    JUDGMENT       347 

the  case  simpliciter  upon  its  '  merits.'     But  fairness  and  competency 
were  alike  lacking.''  ^ 

In  other  words,  Denison  would  appeal  against  the  Bath 
judgment  on  "  its  merits  "  when  a  Court  came  into  existence 
which  would  take  his  side.  A  very  convenient  policy  for 
the  defendant,  no  doubt,  but  one  which  can  only  be  allowed 
in  a  country  where  law  has  ceased  to  exist,  and  every  man 
is  allowed  to  do  that  which  is  right  in  his  own  eyes.  It  is 
evident  from  what  he  said  that,  if  every  existing  Court  of 
Law  in  England  had  given  judgment  against  him,  the  Arch- 
deacon would  have  been  as  much  a  rebel  as  he  was  to  the 
Bath  judgment.  There  was  not,  it  seems,  in  1856,  in 
existence  a  tribunal  "competent  to  pronounce  in  matter 
of  doctrine  ;  "  and,  in  1878,  when  he  wrote  his  Notes  of  My 
Life,  matters  were  still  worse,  for  then  there  did  not  exist  a 
Court  competent  to  pronounce  a  judgment  even  "in  re- 
spect of  matter  of  worship."  Of  course,  all  this  sort  of  talk 
was  simply  the  language  of  an  anarchist,  which  left  every 
clergyman  in  the  Church  free  to  be  a  law  unto  himself. 
The  Ritualists  are  acting  on  the  lines  of  Archdeacon  Denison 
at  the  present  moment,  and  frankly  tell  us  that  even  the 
Church  of  England,  as  a  whole,  has  no  power  to  forbid  cer- 
tain Romish  doctrines  and  practices  which  they  hold  dear, 
though  they  are  disliked  and  opposed  by  the  overwhelming 
majority  of  loyal  Churchmen.  We  have  been  reminded 
again  and  again  of  late  that  the  Church  of  England  is  not 
an  independent  Church,  but  is  subject  to  the  rest  of  what 
is  somewhat  vaguely  termed  "  the  Catholic  Church."  The 
Archbishop's  Court  at  Bath  was  a  purely  spiritual  Court  ; 
yet  it  was  treated  with  as  much  contempt  and  rebellion  as 
though  it  were  the  most  Erastian  tribunal  ever  set  up  by  a 
State  anxious  to  oppress  the  Church. 

No  sooner  was  Archdeacon  Denison  condemned  than  a 
great  hue  and  cry  was  heard  throughout  the  length  and 
breadth  of  the  land.  The  Puseyites  were  furious  ;  but  all 
they  could  do  was  to  rally  round  the  Archdeacon  and  prac- 
tically, though  not  in  so  many  words,  declare :  "  We  are 
one  with  you.     There  shall  be  not  one  rebel,  but  a  small 

1  Denison's  Notes  of  My  Life,  p.  242. 


348  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

army  of  rebels  on  your  side."  Dr.  Pusey  boldly  wrote  : — 
"The  only  course  open  to  us  is,  publicly  to  apprise  those 
in  authority  over  us,  that  we  ca?inot  obey  them  in  this,  and  to 
go  on  as  before,  leaving  it  to  them  to  interfere  with  us,  or  no, 
as  they  may  think  lit."  ^  This  was  done  by  means  of  the  cele- 
brated Protest  against  the  Bath  judgment,  signed  by  Pusey, 
Keble,  Bennett,  Carter,  Neale,  Isaac  Williams,  and  other 
members  of  the  party.  Those  who  signed  this  document 
identified  themselves  with  the  views  for  which  Denison  had 
been  condemned,  and  appealed  against  the  Archbishop's 
judgment,  not  to  any  existing  Court  of  Law,  which  they 
knew  very  well  would  condemn  them,  but  "to  a  lawful 
Synod  of  all  the  Churches  of  our  communion,"  which  had 
no  existence,  and  which,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  has  had  no 
existence  from  that  day  to  this.  These  protesters  against 
Protestantism  affirmed  their  belief  that  :  "  The  wicked, 
although  they  can  *  in  no  wise  be  partakers  of  Christ,'  nor 
'spiritually  eat  His  Flesh  and  drink  His  Blood,'  yet  do  in 
the  Sacrament  not  only  take,  but  eat  and  drink  unwor- 
thily to  their  own  condemnation  the  Body  and  Blood  of 
Christ,  which  they  do  not  discern."  Surely  this  is  a  self- 
contradictory  paragraph  ?  If,  as  is  here  clearly  asserted, 
the  wicked  "eat  and  drink"  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ, 
surely  they  must  at  the  same  time  be  "  partakers  of  Christ," 
whom  they  are  supposed  to  have  eaten  with  their  bodily 
mouths.  The  protesters  also  declared  :  "We  appeal  from 
the  said  opinion,  decision,  or  sentence  of  his  Grace,  in 
the  first  instance,  to  a  free  and  lawful  Synod  of  all  the 
Churches  of  our  communion,  when  such  by  God's  mercy 
may  be  had."^ 

Of  course,  this  Protest  against  the  Bath  judgment  was 
equivalent  to  a  challenge  to  those  in  authority  to  prosecute 
the  men  who  signed  it.  It  is  much  to  be  regretted  that  the 
challenge  was  not  accepted.  I  have  no  doubt  whatever 
that  the  final  decision  would  have  been  against  the  Roman- 
isers,  and  an  effectual  blow  would  thus  have  been  inflicted 
on  the  Puseyites,  from  which  they  would  not  have  re- 
covered.    But  our  rulers  in  the  Church  of  England  have 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  iii.  p.  444. 
^  Idid.  pp.  440-442. 


THE  SOCIETY  OF  THE  HOLY  CROSS       349 

never  been  noted  for  an  excess  of  courage,  and  so  they  let 
the  grand  opportunity  slip  by.     Will  it  ever  come  again  ? 

The  year  1855  witnessed  the  formation  of  the  first  secret 
Society  of  the  Romanisers.  The  Society  of  the  Holy  Cross 
was  formed  on  February  28,  1855,  and  its  first  secret 
Synod  was  held  on  the  3rd  of  the  following  May.  From 
the  very  first  it  loved  darkness  rather  than  light,  dreading 
nothing  so  much  as  publicity.  As  its  Master  said,  at  its 
Synod,  held  in  May  1876  :  ''The  bond  of  union  between 
the  Brethren  was  to  be  as  strict  as  possible.  None  but 
themselves  were  to  know  their  names,  or  of  the  existence  of 
the  Society,  except  those  to  whom  it  might  be  named  to 
induce  them  to  join  :  but  this  only  with  leave  of  the 
Society."  ^  For  the  first  eight  years  of  its  existence  its 
statutes  and  rules  existed  only  in  manuscript  ;  the  authori- 
ties were  afraid  to  commit  them  to  print.  The  names  of 
the  Brethren  for  the  first  ten  years  "  were  only  to  be  found 
in  a  written  book  kept  by  the  Secretary "  ;  ^  and  when,  at 
last,  in  1865,  they  were  printed  for  the  first  time,  every  care 
was  taken  to  prevent  a  copy  falling  into  Protestant  hands, 
a  precaution  which  is  still  adopted,  for  there  is  nothing  the 
members  more  dread  than  that  their  names  shall  be  known 
to  the  public.  The  Society  of  the  Holy  Cross  is  very 
influential,  and  is  more  secret,  more  Romanising,  and  more 
dangerous  now  than  ever  it  has  been  before.  An  exposure 
of  its  history  and  work,  based  on  its  own  secret  documents, 
may  be  read  in  the  second  chapter  of  my  Secret  History  of 
tJie  Oxford  Movement,  and  therefore  I  need  not  say  anything 
more  about  it  here. 

Two  years  later,  in  1857,  the  Association  for  the  Pro- 
motion of  the  Unity  of  Christendom  was  formed  by 
members  of  the  Church  of  England,  the  Church  of  Rome, 
and  the  Greek  Church.  Its  members  are  expected  to  pray 
that  all  those  three  Churches  may  become  united  and  form 
one  Church  again.  It  would  be  a  bad  day  for  England 
were  such  a  request  granted.  Some  years  after  its  forma- 
tion the  Pope  ordered  all  the  Roman  Catholics  to  leave  the 
Association,  though  I  see  from  one  of  its  recent  reports 

^  S.S.C.  Master's  Address,  May  Synod,  1876,  p.  2. 
2  Ibid.  p.  4. 


350  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

that  some  Roman  Catholics  are  still  members.  Since  the 
publication  of  my  Secret  History  of  the  Oxfoi'd  Movement, 
in  the  tenth  chapter  of  which  the  Romanising  character 
of  this  organisation  is  proved  from  its  own  documents, 
some  startling  revelations  as  to  its  early  history  have  been 
given  to  the  world  in  the  Life  and  Letters  of  Ambrose 
PJiillipps  de  Lisle,  who  was  one  of  its  principal  founders. 
The  way  had  been  carefully  prepared  for  the  formation 
of  such  an  Association.  In  1857  Ritualism  had  made  con- 
siderable progress.  A  Roman  Catholic  barrister,  writing 
to  the  Union — a  new  paper  representing  the  advanced 
Romanisers — remarked  : — "The  Oxford  Movement  is  still 
doing  its  work,  and  spreading  the  true  principles  of  Angli- 
canism ;  which,  if  carried  out,  are,  as  all  allow,  almost 
identical  with  those  of  Catholicism.  Go  to  such  churches 
as  St.  Barnabas',  Pimlico  ;  and  St.  Mary,  Osnaburg  Street 
(both  of  which  I  have  recently  visited  to  see  with  my  own 
eyes,  and  to  judge  for  myself,  instead  of  letting  the  con- 
verts judge  for  me,  as  they  do  for  most  Catholics)  and  tell 
me  in  what  they  differ  from  our  own?"^  By  this  time 
Roman  Catholic  Vestments  had  been  restored  by  a  small 
section  of  the  clergy,  and  the  Mass,  though  as  yet  without 
the  name,  was  exalted  in  certain  quarters  as  highly  as  in 
the  Church  of  Rome. 

"Our  firm  conviction,"  said  the  Union,  in  a  leading  article,  "is 
that,  until  the  Sacrifice  of  the  Altar  takes  its  legitimate  and  appointed 
place  in  our  Sunday  worship,  we  shall  only  remain  hampered  by 
Puritan  traditions,  and  be  hindered  in  our  great  work  of  Catholicising 
England.  If  this  were  done,  the  charge  about  'unlighted  Altars  and 
unstoled  priests '  would  fall  to  the  ground.  Those  who  are  led  to 
underrate  this  revival  must  seek  to  accomplish  it  effectually.  Every- 
thing should  give  place  to  this.  The  Ahar  should  be  duly  raised 
and  effectively  vested  and  adorned.  Cross,  lights,  flower  vases, 
pictures,  book-rest,  chalice,  and  corjjoral  should  all  be  provided. 
The  Sacred  Vestments  should  be  used  to  distinguish  the  ordinary 
ofifice  from  the  Tremendous  Sacrifice.  Then  shams  and  empty 
ceremonies,  'table  prayers,'  Ten  Commandments,  and  the  'form 
and  ceremony '   of  going  to  the  Altar   to   '  read   the  Epistle  and 

1   Union,  August  14,  1857,  p.  102. 


IDENTITY  OF  ROMAN  AND  RITUALISTIC  CONFESSIONALS  35  I 

Gospel'  would  cease  to  be  perpetuated.     Then  would  our  flocks 
learn  what  true  worship  is."  ^ 

The  anxiety  herein  manifested  to  get  rid  of  the  Ten 
Commandments,  as  a  part  of  the  service  called  "the 
Sacrifice  of  the  Altar,"  is  very  instructive.  It  shows  that 
the  Ritualists  are  not  on  terms  of  good  friendship  with 
them.  They  must  feel  very  uncomfortable  when,  in  church 
— as  I  have  frequently  witnessed — a  clergyman  reads  out 
the  Second  Commandment  against  the  use  of  images  in 
worship,  while  the  ends  of  his  surplice  are,  perhaps,  touch- 
ing one  of  the  God-condemned  articles,  let  in  to  the  frontal 
of  the  Communion  Table,  while  other  images  are  seen 
scattered  throughout  the  chancel.  In  these  dangerous  days 
we  may  well  be  thankful  fur  the  law  of  the  Church,  which 
commands  the  placing  of  the  Ten  Commandments  in  a 
prominent  position  in  every  parish  church,  from  which, 
alas  !  many  Ritualistic  priests  remove  them,  thus  showing 
themselves  to  be  the  enemies  of  God  and  the  Church. 

Next  to  the  so-called  "  Sacrifice  of  the  Altar,"  the 
Romanisers  threw  considerable  energy,  at  this  time,  into 
propagating  the  Confessional.  Nothing  of  a  modified 
character  would  please  them  :  they  must  have  Auricular 
Confession  as  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  or  go 
without  it  altogether.  In  a  leading  article,  the  new  organ 
of  the  advanced  section  boldly  and  unblushingly  de- 
clared : — 

"Every  one  knows  that  the  only  difference  between  Confession 
in  the  Roman  and  English  Churches  is  that,  in  the  former,  it  is 
compulsory  ;  and  in  the  latter  not  so.  The  mode  of  making  and 
receiving  a  Confession  is  substantially  identical ;  the  same  questions 
are  asked ;  the  same  kind  of  penances  given ;  the  same  consolation 
offered ;  and  it  appears  to  us  somewhat  dishonest  to  pretend  that  it 
is  otherwise."  - 

A  month  later  the  Union  repeated  its  assertion,  which, 
unfortunately,  is  as  true  now  as  when  first  uttered,  except 
that  the  word  "  Ritualists "  should  be  substituted  for 
"  England "  : — "  We   continue   to    maintain    that    there    is 

^   Union,  December  4,  1857,  p.  353. 
-  Ibid.  August  20,  1858,  p.  540. 


352  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

no  virtual  distinction  between  the  doctrine  of  Rome  and 
England  as  regards  the  Ordinance  of  Confession."^ 

In  this  way  the  Romeward  Movement  was  being  actively 
carried  on.  The  Church  of  England  was  being  made  ready 
to  reunite  with  Rome,  by  teaching  Roman  doctrine  and, 
as  far  as  possible,  turning  the  parish  churches  into  imita- 
tions of  Roman  Catholic  places  of  worship.  The  work  had, 
as  we  have  seen,  been  really  going  on  ever  since  1833,  but 
now  the  time  had  arrived  when  the  conspirators  felt  them- 
selves powerful  enough  to  band  together  into  a  society, 
having  for  its  real  object  the  submission  of  the  Eastern 
churches  and  the  Church  of  England  unto  the  Church  of 
Rome.  But  before  such  an  organisation  could  be  founded, 
a  great  deal  of  subtlety  had  to  be  called  into  action,  and, 
above  all,  the  Pope  and  his  Propaganda  had  to  be  con- 
sulted. Of  course,  all  the  preliminary  work  had  to  be  done 
in  the  dark,  and  the  utmost  possible  secrecy  was  enjoined  on 
all  who  were  called  upon  to  organise  the  new,  daring,  and 
united  movement  towards  Rome.  The  negotiations  with 
the  Propaganda  at  Rome  were  undertaken  by  Mr.  Ambrose 
Phillipps  de  Lisle,  as  a  devout  and  humble  servant  of  the 
Pope.  On  May  18,  1857,  he  wrote  a  long  and  confidential 
letter  on  the  subject  to  Cardinal  Barnabo,  Prefect  of  the 
Propaganda : — 

"I  write  to  you,"  said  De  Lisle,  "most  eminent  and  reverend 
Cardinal  of  the  Holy  Roman  Church,  concerning  a  matter  of  great 
importance,  but  of  great  secrecy  and  delicacy,  which  I  humbly  pray 
your  Eminence  to  lay  before  our  most  holy  Lord  the  Pope.  I  will 
briefly  explain  the  matter  if  you  will  give  me  your  ear. 

"There  is  at  this  moment  a  large  party  in  the  Established  Church 
of  this  realm  (called  the  Anglican  Church)  which  have  conceived 
the  idea  of  reuniting  their  National  Church  with  the  holy  Mother 
Catholic,  and  also  of  placing  the  same  under  canonical  obedience  to  the 
authority  of  the  holy  Apostolic  See,  which  for  three  hundred  years 
heretical  malice  has  so  miserably  delighted  to  cast  away. 

"  Persons  of  great  dignity,  who  are  the  heads  of  this  party,  with 
whom  I  am  related  either  by  blood  or  by  marriage  or  by  friendship 
have  communicated  their  idea  to  me,  and  their  longing,  begging  me 


^   Union,  September  17,  1858,  p.  601. 


SENSATIONAL  LETTER  TO  CARDINAL  BARNABO   353 

to  open  and  reveal  to  your  Eminence  the  matter,  in  order  to  its  being 
known  to  his  Holiness  the  Pope,  and  if  it  be  lawful  to  beg  of  him  iti 
all  humility  his  Apostolic  blessing  upon  the  matter  taken  up  and 
already  begun. 

"  These  persons  have  designated  me,  although  unworthy,  to 
communicate  this  business  to  the  Holy  See,  partly  because  they 
wished  to  act  most  secretly  on  account  of  the  intimate  relations  of 
their  Church  with  the  civil  power  of  this  realm,  and  because  Her 
Majesty's  Government  at  this  moment  is  directed  by  Viscount 
Palmerston,  a  man  by  no  means  friendly  to  the  Catholic  Church 
and  things  Catholic ;  partly  because  they  were  unwilling  on  account 
of  political  reasons  to  divulge  the  matter  to  our  holy  Father  the 
Archbishop  Cardinal  of  Westminster,  our  Catholic  Primate,  there 
being  a  certain  suspicion  in  existence,  not  without  natural  causes, 
between  the  National  Anglican  Church  and  the  local  Catholic 
Church,  as  your  Eminence  will  easily  apprehend. 

"This  Party,  therefore,  wish  to  show  your  Eminence  their  sincere 
desire  to  reconcile  as  soon  as  possible  their  own  Church  with  the 
Holy  See.  But  so  great  an  undertaking  cannot  be  carried  through 
all  at  once.  The  Party  which  has  taken  up  the  matter  numbers 
two  thousand  priests  and  ten  Bishops,  joined  together  in  this  idea. 
.  .  .  Now  the  ten  Bishops  who  favour  union  are  Salisbury,  Oxford, 
Chichester,  London,  Exeter,  in  England,  all  in  the  Province  of 
Canterbury ;  the  other  four  are  in  Scotland,  the  Bishop  of  Brechin 
with  three  others.  To  these  Bishops  are  united  two  thousand  priests, 
amongst  whom  are  some  Archdeacons,  Deans,  and  Canons,  some 
Rectors  of  Collegiate  Churches,  others  parish  priests  and  vicars.  To 
this  section  of  the  Anglican  clergy  belong  a  very  large  body  of  men 
of  the  richest  and  noblest  families  of  the  realm,  amongst  whom  are 
some  most  illustrious  persons  very  closely  bound  to  myself,  who  held 
ofifice  under  the  Crown  in  1852,  in  the  Government  of  the  Earl  of 
Derby.  They  have  made  it  known  to  me  that  they  wish  the  busi- 
ness begun  to  succeed. 

"Accordingly,  this  Party  of  the  Anglican  Church  humbly  desires 
ecclesiastical  reunion  of  the  National  Church  of  the  whole  British 
Empire  with  the  holy  Catholic  Mother,  by  embracing  without  any 
ambiguity  all  the  articles  defined  in  the  sacred  Council  of  Trent  and 
the  whole  Orthodox  Faith ;  also  the  latest  definition  of  the  Immacu- 
late Conception  of  our  Lady,  the  holy  Virgin  Mary,  Mother  of  God  ; 
and  by  submitting  their  Church  to  the  divine  authority  of  the  holy 
Apostolic  See,  with  all  affection  of  the  heart  and  most  faithful 
canonical  obedience. 

"  But,  as  your  Eminence  will  easily  understand,  this  Party  in  the 


354  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

National  Anglican  Church,  as  yet  a  minority  in  the  whole  kingdom, 
can  for  the  present  do  no  more  than,  with  all  prudence  but  zeal, 
dispose  the  people  to  take  up  so  grand  an  object  in  the  future  .  .  . 
For  such  an  end  they  already  teach  amongst  the  people  the  whole  of 
the  Cathohc  doctrine,  not  less  explicitly  than  we  Catholics  ourselves 
are  able  to  do  it,  and  with  the  greatest  reverence.  It  is  indeed 
wonderful,  and  for  so  many  centuries  quite  unhoped  for !  They 
teach  the  Sacrifice  of  the  Mass,  the  true  presence  and  Transubstan- 
tiation,  the  oblation  of  the  most  holy  Body  and  Blood  of  our  Lord 
for  the  quick  and  the  dead ;  the  Invocation  of  the  Blessed  Virgin 
and  the  Saints,  the  veneration  of  sacred  images ;  also,  so  far  as  they 
prudently  can,  concerning  the  Primacy  of  the  holy  Apostolic  See  .  ,  . 
Whatever  may  come  to  pass,  they  requested  me  to  lay  the  matter 
before  your  Eminence,  O  most  excellent  Cardinal,  requesting  your 
generous  prayers  for  its  success,  and  also  (if  it  be  lawful)  desiring 
ivith  their  whole  heart  and  soul  some  word  of  encouragetfient  from  our 
most  holy  Lord  the  Supreme  Pontiff  that  all  things  may  turn  out 
well."i 

No  doubt  the  writer  of  this  very  remarkable  letter  was 
an  enthusiast  in  the  cause  to  which  he  had  devoted  his  life, 
and  somewhat  too  hopeful  as  to  the  immediate  future,  and 
I  think  he  was  probably  misinformed  as  to  the  English 
Bishops  being  a  party  to  the  scheme.  Yet  I  have  no  doubt 
that  he  was  perfectly  sincere  in  conveying  this  information 
to  Cardinal  Barnabo,  and  that  he  had  only  too  much  reason 
for  rejoicing  at  what  was  being  done  in  the  English  Church 
by  the  traitors  within  her  camp,  whose  dearest  and  dis- 
graceful ambition  it  was  to  hand  her  over,  bound  hand  and 
foot,  to  the  bondage  of  her  bitterest  enemy,  the  Church  of 
Rome.  Mr.  De  Lisle  soon  received  a  favourable  reply  from 
Cardinal  Barnabo,  who  wrote  to  him  : — 

"  Most  Honoured  Sir, — The  subject  brought  to  my  notice  by 
your  letter  of  the  i8th  of  May  last  has  given  me  the  deepest  consola- 
tion. For  nothing  could  be  better,  or  more  in  accordance  with  my 
prayers  as  Prefect  of  this  Sacred  Congregation,  than  the  accom- 
plishment of  the  designs  which  your  letter  declares  to  be  of  not 
insuperable  difificulty. 

"  And  this  matter,  which  I  at  once  commend  in  my  prayers  to 
the  Omnipotent  God,  I  shall  be  most  happy  to  place  before  our 

1  Life  atid  Letters  of  Ambrose  Phillipps  de  Lisle,  vol.  i.  pp.  375-377. 


THE    BEST   THING    FOR    ROME  355 

most  holy  Lord  Pius  IX.  on  his  return  to  Rome,  so  that  what  is 
already  a  subject  of  hope  may  soon  be  brought  to  a  happy  issue  for 
the  glory  of  God  and  the  eternal  salvation  of  souls. 

"Moreover,  I  return  my  thanks  over  and  over  again,  and  I 
shall  pray  for  all  things  to  turn  out  favourably  according  to  our 
wishes. 

"Your  Lordship's  most  obliged, 

"  Alexander,  Card.  Barnabo,  Prefect^  ^ 

With  this  encouraging  letter  in  his  possession,  De  Lisle 
next  approached  Dr.  Newman,  and  laid  the  whole  plan,  in 
strict  secrecy,  before  him,  asking  for  his  opinion  and 
guidance.  Newman  replied  : — "  I  thank  you  very  much  for 
your  most  confidential  letter,  and  the  very  interesting  infor- 
mation it  contains.  ...  I  am  still  somewhat  uneasy  lest  per- 
sons who  ought  to  be  Catholics  should  allow  themselves  to 
bargain  and  make  terms.  Should  not  they  have  some  pre- 
sumption from  the  Holy  See — or  in  some  formal  way 
surrender  themselves  ?"  2  There  is  something  mysterious 
as  to  what  Newman  meant  when  he  asked  thus,  "  Should 
not  they  have  some  presumption  from  the  Holy  See?" 
Three  days  before  this  he  wrote  to  De  Lisle  : — "  I  perfectly 
agree  with  you  in  thinking  that  the  Movement  of  1833  is 
not  over  in  the  country,  whatever  be  the  state  of  Oxford 
itself  ;  also,  /  think  it  is  for  the  interest  of  Catholicis7n  that 
individuals  should  not  join  lis,  but  should  remain  to  leaven  the 
mass.  I  mean  thatlYiWi  WILL  DO  MORE  FOR  US  BY  REMAIN- 
ING WHERE  THEY  ARE  THAN  BY  COMING  OVER,  but  then  they 
have  individual  souls,  and  with  what  heart  can  I  do  any- 
thing to  induce  them  to  preach  to  others,  if  they  themselves 
thereby  become  castaways  ?  "  ^ 

Thus  encouraged,  with  the  approval  of  the  Cardinal 
Prefect  of  the  Propaganda  and  Dr.  Newman,  the  con- 
spirators held  a  meeting  in  London  on  July  4,  1857,  at 
which  they  passed  the  following  six  resolutions  (to  be  sent 
to  the  Pope),  which  were  kept  as  a  profound  secret  from 
the  public  for  forty-two  years,  until  the  publication  of  De 
Lisle's  biography,  at  the  close  of  1899.     I  can  understand 

^  Life  and  Letters  of  Ambrose  Fhillipps  de  Lisle,  vol.  i.  p.  378. 
»  Ibid.  p.  369.  »  Ibid.  p.  368. 


356  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Roman  Catholics  voting  for  these  resolutions,  but  how 
English  Church  clergymen,  with  a  spark  of  common  honesty, 
could  approve  of  them  is  more  than  I  can  comprehend : — 

"  I.  To  express  their  gratitude  and  respect  for  the  person  of  his 
Eminence  they  vote  a  golden  chalice  studded  with  jewels  and  a 
paten  of  beaten  Australian  gold,  to  be  presented  to  Cardinal 
Barnabo  as  a  pledge  of  the  hoped-for  Reunion  between  the  English 
and  Roman  Churches. 

"  2.  To  carry  out  the  wishes  expressed  in  the  Cardinal's  letter, 
they  determine  never  to  rest  until  they  have  done  everything  possible 
to  reunite  the  said  two  Churches,  and  restore  the  authority  of 
THE  Holy  See  in  England. 

"3.  They  express  the  opinion  that  after  the  lapse  of  some  years 
the  plan  will  become  feasible. 

"  4.  They  resolve  that  a  treatise,  exact,  statistical,  and  historical, 
dealing  with  the  vexed  question  of  Anglican  Orders,  shall  be  drawn 
up  by  one  of  their  own  body,  and  sub^nitted  to  Pope  Pius  IX.  for  his 
supreme  and  authoriiative  judgment. 

"5.  They  propose  to  organise  a  select  body  of  learned  preachers 
to  bring  forward,  and  expound  and  recommend,  the  godly  reunion 
of  all  dissident  Churches  with  their  holy  Catholic  Mother  Church, 
in  all  Churches  and  Colleges  and  Cathedrals  where  the  Bishop's 
licence  to  do  so  can  be  obtained. 

"  6.  They  propose  to  establish  a  Society  or  Association  of  Prayer 
to  promote  this  sacred  object,  of  which  the  only  obligation  shall  be  to 
recite  daily  the  Lord's  Prayer  once,  and  the  Liturgical  Prayer  for 
Peace  and  Unity,  *  ut  ecclesiam  secundum  Voluntatem  Ttiam  pacificare 
et  coadunare  digneris,'  and  beg  of  his  Holiness  to  attach  an  Indul- 
gence to  this  prayer,  to  be  extended  even  to  Anglicans  not  in  external 
communion  with  the  Holy  See,  should  it  seem  good  and  be  within 
the  limits  of  the  power  of  the  Supreme  Pontiff  to  do  so."  ^ 

It  must  be  admitted  by  every  honest  man  that  these 
resolutions  were  a  disgrace  to  every  member  of  the 
Church  of  England  who  agreed  to  them.  The  Oxford 
Movement  has  no  reason  to  be  proud  of  those  of  her 
children  who  thus  acted  in  a  way  which  puts  to  shame 
every  idea  of  honesty  and  honour.  And  so  "  to  promote 
this  sacred  object,"  of  bringing  the  English  Church  to  bow 
the   neck   once    more   to    Rome,   the  Association    for   the 

^  Life  and  Letters  of  Ambrose  Phillipps  de  Lisle,  vol.  i.    pp.  379,  380. 


THE    HON.    AND    REV.    ROBERT    LIDDELL  357 

Promotion  of  the  Unity  of  Christendom  was  actually 
founded,  at  a  private  meeting  held  in  the  parish  of  St. 
Clement  Danes,  Strand,  London,  on  September  8,  1857. 
Since  then  it  has  continued  its  Romeward  progress,  and 
although,  as  I  write,  Mr.  De  Lisle's  biography  has  been 
before  the  public  for  ten  months,  I  have  yet  to  learn  that 
the  A.P.U.C.  has  uttered  one  word  of  censure  of  the  docu- 
ment which  led  to  its  formation,  or  denied  its  authenticity. 
Scores  of  churches  are  placed  at  its  disposal  every  year 
for  celebrations  of  Holy  Communion  on  behalf  of  its 
objects.  It  is  understood  to  have  over  10,000  clerical  and 
lay  members  scattered  throughout  the  English  Church, 
but  nobody  knows  who  they  are,  except  the  officials  at 
its  head  office  in  London. 

The  Hon.  and  Rev.  Robert  Liddell,  who  succeeded  Mr. 
Bennett  as  Vicar  of  St.  Paul's,  Knightsbridge,  was  quite  as 
far  removed  from  Protestantism  as  his  predecessor.  In- 
stead of  diminishing  he  added  to  the  Ritual  and  ornaments 
of  the  Church.  Intense  dissatisfaction  was  created  in  the 
parish  by  these  changes,  and  at  last  the  parishioners  decided 
to  elect  a  Protestant  Churchwarden  to  look  after  their 
interests.  The  gentleman  they  selected  was  Mr.  Westerton, 
who  had  all  the  courage  of  his  convictions,  and  soon  made 
things  very  uncomfortable  for  the  Vicar.  Early  in  1854 
Mr.  Westerton  wrote  to  the  Bishop  of  London  (Dr.  Blom- 
field)  requesting  him  to  order  the  removal  of  certain 
ornaments  from  St.  Paul's  Church  ;  but  this  the  Bishop 
declined  to  do,  pleading  that  he  doubted  whether  he  pos- 
sessed the  power  to  order  their  removal,  except  through 
a  decree  in  the  Consistory  Court.  Some  of  the  ornaments 
complained  of  were,  he  believed,  not  illegal.  At  about  the 
same  time  Mr.  Beal,  a  resident  in  the  district  of  St.  Bar- 
nabas, Pimlico  (a  District  Church  in  the  charge  of  Mr.  Lid- 
dell), applied  to  the  Consistory  Court  for  a  monition  to  the 
Chapelwardens  to  remove  certain  ornaments  from  St. 
Barnabas'  Church.  Mr.  Westerton  also  applied  to  the 
same  Court  for  a  monition  as  to  the  ornaments  in  St. 
Paul's  Church.  The  two  cases  were  argued  together  in  the 
Consistory  Court,  and  at  length  judgment  was  delivered 


358  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

by  Dr.  Lushington,  on  December  5,  1855.  The  following 
were  the  subjects  with  which  he  had  to  deal,  together  with 
his  decisions  thereon  : — 

1.  A  High  Altar  of  carved  wood,  raised  on  platform  in  St.  Paul's 
Church — Being  of  ivood^  Legal. 

2.  A  High  Altar  of  stone  in  St.  Barnabas'  Church —///(?^a/. 

3.  A  Credence  Table — Legal. 

4.  Candlesticks  and  Candles,  used  when  not  needed  for  light — 
Lllegal. 

5.  Coloured  Cloths  on  Communion  Table  changed  according  to 
the  seasons — Lllegal. 

6.  Embroidered  lace  cloths  on  Communion  Table  at  time  of 
Communion — Lllegal. 

7.  Crosses — Illegal. 

From  this  judgment  Mr.  Liddell  appealed  to  the  Court 
of  Arches,  where,  on  December  20,  1856,  Sir  J.  Dodson 
gave  judgment  confirming  in  every  respect  the  judgment 
of  the  Consistory  Court.  Under  these  circumstances  what 
was  the  Vicar  to  do  ?  Two  purely  Spiritual  Courts  had 
decided  against  him.  There  was  only  an  appeal  to  the 
Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council  open  to  him.  But 
this  Court  was,  in  the  estimation  of  the  Puseyites,  a  purely 
State  tribunal  whose  decisions  had  no  weight  in  conscience. 
Yet  if  Caesar  would  only  upset  the  decisions  of  the  Spiritual 
Courts,  then  to  Caesar  they  would  go.  It  was  not  a  con- 
sistent position  to  take  up — there  is  not  an  atom  of  legal 
consistency  in  the  whole  Romeward  Movement — but  it  was 
a  convenient  one.  To  appeal  to  the  Judicial  Committee  on 
such  a  subject  was  to  acknowledge  its  competency  and 
right  to  decide.  So  to  the  Judicial  Committee  Mr.  Liddell 
went,  hoping  it  would  overthrow  the  Spiritual  Courts' 
authority,  when  blessings  would  be  upon  it ;  but  if  it 
failed  in  this  respect,  why,  then,  the  sooner  the  Judicial 
Committee  was  pulled  down,  and  a  Court  of  Appeal  more 
favourable  to  the  Ritualists  erected  in  its  place,  the  better 
it  would  be  for  the  law-breaking  clergy. 

The  appeal  of  Mr.  Liddell  was  heard  before  the  Judicial 
Committee  of  Privy  Council  on  February  9,  lo,  11,  12,  13, 
14,  and  16,  1857.     Judgment  was  delivered  on  the  21st  of 


JUDGMENT    IN    LIDDELL    v.    WESTERTON  359 

March  1857.      From  it  I  give  the  following  extracts,  dealing 
with  the  seven  points  mentioned  above  : — 

I  and  2.  Tables  and  Stone  Altars. — "The  Rubric  of  the  present 
Prayer-Book  provides  only  that  at  the  Communion  time,  the  table, 
having  a  fair  white  linen  cloth  upon  it,  shall  stand  in  the  body  of 
the  Church  or  chancel,  where  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer  are 
appointed  to  be  said  ;  and  the  priest  is  to  commence  the  service 
standing  at  the  north  side  of  the  table.  The  term  'Altar'  is  never 
used  to  describe  it,  and  there  is  an  express  declaration  at  the  close 
of  the  service  against  the  doctrine  of  Transubstantiation,  with  which 
the  ideas  of  an  Altar  and  Sacrifice  are  closely  connected.  Under 
these  circumstances,  the  first  question  is,  whether  the  stone  struc- 
ture at  St.  Barnabas  is  a  Communion  Table  within  the  meaning 
of  the  Canons  and  the  Rubric  ;  and  their  lordships  are  clearly  of 
opinion  that  it  is  not  .  .  .  Their  lordships,  therefore,  are  satisfied 
that  the  decision  upon  this  point  [that  Communion  Tables  must  be 
made  of  wood]  in  Faulkener  v.  Litchfield  is  well  founded,  and  they 
must  advise  her  Majesty  that  the  decree  as  to  the  removal  of  the 
stone  structure  at  St.  Barnabas,  and  the  Cross  upon  it,  and  the  sub- 
stitution of  a  Communion  Table  of  wood,  ought  to  be  affirmed." 

3.  Credence  Tables. — For  the  text  of  the  judgment  on  this  sub- 
ject, and  a  further  extract  on  Altars,  see  above,  chapter  ix.  p.  253. 
"  As  to  the  Credence  Tables,  their  lordships  therefore  must  advise 
a  reversal  of  the  sentence  complained  of." 

4.  Candlesticks  a?id  Candles. — The  Consistory  Court  declared 
lights  illegal  when  not  needed  for  light,  but  did  not  order  the 
removal  of  either  candlesticks  or  candles.  Their  lordships  now 
said  : — "  The  judgment  complained  of  has  not  ordered  the  removal 
of  the  table  [in  St.  Paul's]  or  of  the  candlesticks,  but  only  of  the 
Cross,  the  Credence  Table,  and  the  cloths.  There  is  no  appeal 
against  this  order  as  far  as  it  permits  the  table  and  candlesticks  to 
remain,  and  it  is  therefore  not  open  to  their  lordships  to  consider 
the  judgment  with  reference  to  the  articles  not  ordered  to  be  removed." 

5.  Coloured  Cloths  on  Comfnunion  Table. — "  In  this  case  their 
lordships  do  not  see  any  sufficient  reason  for  interference,  and  they 
must  therefore  advise  the  reversal  of  the  sentence  as  to  the  cloths 
used  for  the  covering  of  the  Lord's  Table  during  the  time  of  Divine 
Service,  both  with  respect  to  St.  Paul's  and  St.  Barnabas." 

6.  Embroidered  Lace  on  Conununion  Table. — "  With  respect  to  the 
embroidered  linen  and  lace  used  on  the  Communion  Table  at  the 
time  of  the  ministration  of  the  Holy  Communion.  The  Rubric  and 
the  Canon  prescribe  the  use  of  a  fair  white  linen  cloth,  and  both  the 


360  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

learned  Judges  in  the  Court  below  have  been  of  opinion  that  em- 
broidery and  lace  are  not  consistent  with  the  meaning  of  that  expres- 
sion, having  regard  to  the  nature  of  the  table  upon  which  the  cloth  is  to 
be  used.  Although  their  lordships  are  not  disposed  in  any  case,  to 
restrict  within  narrower  limits  than  the  law  has  imposed,  the  discretion 
which,  within  those  limits,  is  justly  allowed  to  congregations  by  the 
rules  both  of  the  Ecclesiastical  and  the  Common  Law  Courts,  the 
directions  of  the  Rubric  must  be  complied  with  ;  and  upon  the  whole 
their  lordships  do  not  dissent  from  the  construction  of  the  Rubric 
adopted  by  the  present  decree  upon  this  point ;  and  they  must  there- 
fore advise  her  Majesty  to  afifirm  it." 

7.  Crosses. — "  Upon  the  whole,  their  lordships,  after  the  most 
anxious  consideration,  liave  come  to  the  conclusion  that  Crosses,  as 
distinguished  from  Crucifixes,  have  been  in  use,  as  ornaments  of 
churches,  from  the  earliest  periods  of  Christianity ;  that  when  used 
as  mere  emblems  of  the  Cliristian  faith,  and  not  as  objects  of  super- 
stitious reverence,  they  may  still  lawfully  be  erected  as  architectural 
decorations  of  churches ;  that  the  wooden  Cross  erected  on  the 
Chancel  screen  of  St.  Barnabas  is  to  be  considered  as  a  mere 
architectural  ornament ;  and  that  as  to  this  article,  they  must  advise 
her  Majesty  to  reverse  the  judgment  complained  of." 

"  Next,  with  respect  to  the  wooden  Cross  attached  to  the  Com- 
munion Table  at  St.  Paul's.  Their  lordships  have  already  declared 
their  opinion  that  the  Communion  Table  intended  by  the  Canon 
was  a  table  in  the  ordinary  sense  of  the  word,  flat  and  movable, 
capable  of  being  covered  with  a  cloth,  at  which  or  around  which  the 
communicants  might  be  placed  in  order  to  partake  of  the  Lord's 
Supper,  and  the  question  is,  whether  the  existence  of  a  Cross 
attached  to  the  table  is  consistent  with  the  spirit  or  with  the  letter  of 
those  regulations.  Their  lordships  are  clearly  of  opinion  that  it  is 
not;  and  they  must  recommend  that  upon  this  point  also  the  decree 
complained  of  should  be  affirmed."  ^ 

By  this  appeal  to  the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy 
Council,  Mr.  Liddell  gained  the  following  points: — (i)  The 
carved  wood  table  in  St.  Paul's,  (2)  the  Credence  Table, 
(3)  Coloured  "Altar"  cloths,  changeable  according  to  the 
seasons,  (4)  the  Cross  on  the  Chancel  Screen.  On  the 
other  hand,  it  was  declared  by  the  highest  Court  of  Appeal 
illegal  (i)  to  erect  a  Stone  Altar,  (2)  to  use  Embroidered 
Lace  on  the  Communion  Cloth,  and  (3)  to  erect  a  Cross 

^  The  Judgfnent  of  the  Judicial  Committee  in  Liddell  v.  Westerton.     Edited 
by  A.  F.  Bayford,  LL.D.,  pp.  105-136.     London:  Butterworths.     1857. 


A    RITUALISTIC    REBEL  361 

attached  to  the  Communion  Table.  A  fifth  point,  which 
was  not  appealed  against,  was  that  it  was  declared  illegal  to 
burn  lights  when  not  needed  for  light.  As  to  how  these 
points  are  affected  by  later  judgments,  it  seems  that  they 
are  all  still  illegal.  The  illegality  of  "Altar  Lights"  is  not 
affected  by  the  judgment  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
in  the  Lincoln  Case,  since  his,  as  an  inferior  Court,  could 
not  upset  the  decision  of  the  Judicial  Committee  in  the  case 
of  Martin  v.  Mackonochie  (1868).  When  the  judgment  of 
Archbishop  Benson  subsequently  came  before  the  Judicial 
Committee,  their  lordships  did  not  reverse  their  previous 
judgment  on  lights  given  in  1868,  and  therefore  it  still 
stands  as  the  declared  law  of  the  Church. 

To  his  credit  be  it  recorded,  Mr.  Liddell  at  once 
accepted  the  judgment,  and  in  a  letter  to  his  parishioners 
expressed  his  opinion  that  it  had  "  clearly  defined  some 
points  of  ritual  which  were  previously  deemed  ambiguous, 
and  has  established  beyond  contradiction  the  Church's 
Law,  to  which  I,  for  one,  have  ever  desired  to  yield  loyal 
and  unswerving  obedience."  ^  Not  so,  however,  with  all  his 
brethren.  There  were  rebels  in  their  rank.  One  of  these  was 
the  Rev.  E.  Stuart,  Vicar  of  St.  Mary  Magdalene,  Munster 
Square,  and  one  of  the  founders  of  the  English  Church 
Union.  To  him,  on  March  5,  1858,  the  new  Bishop  of 
London  (Dr.  Tait)  wrote  : — "  I  have  very  carefully  con- 
sidered what  passed  at  my  interview  with  you  yesterday 
in  London  House,  and  I  feel  myself  obliged  to  adhere  to 
the  opinion  I  then  expressed.  I  must,  therefore,  lay  my 
commands  upon  yon  to  discontinue  the  practice  you  have 
introduced  without  any  authority  in  St.  Mary  Magdalene, 
Munster  Square,  of  lighting  the  candles  on  the  Communion 
Table  in  broad  daylight,  except  when  they  may  reason- 
ably be  considered  necessary  or  convenient  for  purpose  of 
light."  2  To  this  Episcopal  command,  Mr.  Stuart,  notwith- 
standing his  oath  of  obedience  to  his  Bishop,  bluntly  and 
rebelliously  replied  : — "  I  write  to  acknowledge  the  receipt 
of  your  letter  of  the  5th  instant,  containing  a  command  to 

^  A  Letter  to  the  Parishioners  of  St.  PatiPs,  Knightsbridgc.     By  the  Hon.  and 
Rev.  Robert  Liddell,  pp.  3,  4.     London  :  Hayes.     1858. 
^  Life  of  Archbishop  Tait,  vol.  i.  p.  220. 


362  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

me  to  discontinue  the  use  of  lights  at  the  celebration  of  the 
Sacrament.  /  must  respectfully  decline  to  obey  this  command, 
as  I  believe  that  in  issuing  it  you  have  (unintentionally, 
of  course)  transgressed  the  limits  of  that  authority  which 
the  Church  of  England  has  committed  to  her  Bishops.  I 
believe  that  you  have  done  this  by  forbidding  what  the  law 
of  the  Church  distinctly  authorises."  ^  To  this  Bishop  Tait 
replied  : — "  I  greatly  regret  that  you  should  think  it  right  to 
disobey  my  command  on  your  own  private  interpretation 
of  what  you  deem  to  be  the  law.  Had  you  read  the 
judgment  of  the  Privy  Council  in  the  Knightsbridge  Case, 
and  Dr.  Lushington's  previous  judgment  on  the  same,  with 
the  care  that  they  deserve,  you  would,  I  doubt  not,  have 
seen  your  error  as  to  the  point  of  law."  -  The  pity  is  that 
the  Bishop  did  not  prosecute  this  rebellious  Vicar ;  but  he 
seems  to  have  dreaded  the  trouble  and  worry,  and  conse- 
quently Mr.  Stuart  was  left  to  do  as  he  liked,  practically 
triumphant  over  his  Bishop.  This  claim  of  Mr.  Stuart  to 
refuse  obedience  to  a  Bishop,  if  he,  in  the  exercise  of  his 
own  opinion,  thinks  he  understands  the  Church's  law  as  to 
doctrine  and  ritual  better  than  the  Bishop  and  all  the 
Courts  of  Law,  is  still  a  very  common  one.  Born  of 
conceit,  pride,  and  self-will,  it  ought  not  to  be  allowed. 
On  this  subject  it  may  be  well  to  quote  here  the  wise  words 
of  Lord  Stowell  in  his  judgment  on  the  Stone  Case  : — 

"But  that  any  clergyman  should  assume  the  liberty  of  inculcating 
his  own  private  opinions,  in  direct  opposition  to  the  doctrines  of  the 
Established  Church,  in  a  place  set  apart  for  its  own  private  worship, 
is  not  more  contrary  to  the  character  of  a  National  Church  than  to 
all  honest  and  rational  conduct.  Nor  is  this  restraint  inconsistent 
with  Christian  liberty ;  for  to  what  purpose  is  it  directed,  but  to 
ensure,  in  the  Established  Church,  that  uniformity  which  tends  to 
edification  ;  leaving  individuals  to  go  elsewhere  according  to  the 
private  persuasions  they  may  entertain.  It  is,  therefore,  a  restraint 
essential  to  the  security  of  the  Church,  and  it  would  be  a  gross 
contradiction  to  its  fundamental  purpose  to  say,  that  it  is  liable  to 
the  reproach  of  persecution,  if  it  does  not  pay  its  Ministers  for 
maintaining  doctrines  contrary  to  its  own.'"^ 

^  Life  of  Archbishop  Tait,  vol.  i.  p.  221.  ^  Ibid.  p.  222. 

^  Considerations  on  the   Exercise  of  Private  Judgment.     By  James  Parker 
Deane,  D.C.L.,  p.  43.     London  :  Parker.     1845. 


CHAPTER    XIII 

The  Convent  Case  at  Lewes — Charges  against  the  Rev.  J.  M.  Neale — 
Riot  at  Lewes  at  the  burial  of  a  Sister  of  Mercy— Bishop  of 
Chichester's  letters  to  Mr.  Scobell  and  the  Mother  Superior — The 
Bishop  withdraws  his  patronage  from  St.  Margaret's,  East  Grin- 
stead — Threatening  the  Bishop — Mr.  Neale's  pamphlet — His  under- 
hand conduct— Confession  on  the  sly — The  Case  of  the  Rev.  Alfred 
Poole — His  licence  withdrawn  —  His  admissions  —  Remarkable 
assertions  at  a  Communicants'  Meeting — Mr.  Poole  appeals  to  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury — His  Judgment — The  Lavington  Case — 
Romanising  books— Theological  Colleges — Attack  upon  Cuddes- 
don  College — Mr.  Golightly's  Facts  and  Documents  Showing  the 
Alarming  State  of  the  Diocese  of  Oxford — An  exciting  controversy. 

Some  events  of  minor  importance,  but  not  without  interest, 
have  now  to  be  recorded.  Considerable  excitement  was 
created  at  Lewes,  Sussex,  towards  the  close  of  the  year 
1857,  in  consequence  of  the  publication  of  a  pamphlet  by 
the  Rev.  John  Scobell,  Rector  of  All  Saints,  Lewes,  and 
Hon.  Canon  of  Chichester,  containing  serious  charges 
against  the  Rev.  J.  M.  Neale,  Chaplain  and  Father  Con- 
fessor of  St.  Margaret's,  East  Grinstead,  Sisterhood.  These 
charges  were  first  privately  made  in  a  letter  addressed  to 
Mr.  Neale  by  Mr.  Scobell,  in  February  1857,  ^^<^  were  as 
follows  : — 

"  I.  That  you  have  been  carrying  on  by  letter,  under  cover  to 
the  Mistress  of  my  Infants'  School,  a  clandestine  correspondence 
with  my  eldest  daughter  while  in  my  house. 

"  2.  That  you  hold  clandestine  and  secret  meetings  with  her,  of 
some  hours'  duration,  in  the  private  apartments  of  my  Infants' 
Schoolhouse,  situate  in  my  parish  of  All  Saints,  Lewes. 

"  3.  That  you  there  usurp,  dishonourably  and  unlawfully,  tlie 
office  of  parish  priest  of  All  Saints,  Lewes ;  wearing  a  surplice ; 
exercising  Liturgical  offices ;  receiving  Confession  and  pronouncing 
Absolution. 

"4.  That  you   assume  to  yourself,    and    allow   yourself  to   be 

viewed   by  my   daughter  and  parishioner  in  the  character  of  her 

363 


364  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

spiritual  guide  and  adviser,  to  my  detriment  as  her  natural  parent 
and  lawful  parish  priest ;  that  you  receive  in  that  character,  at  her 
hands,  the  letters  of  me,  her  father,  for  your  perusal ;  that  you  anim- 
advert, and  dictate  how  they  shall  be  replied  to — how  far  complied 
with — how  far  resisted. 

**  5.  That  you  seek  to  hold  and  keep  up  a  lasting  spiritual 
influence  over  my  daughter  living  in  my  house.  That  you  seek  to 
guide  her  future  course  of  life.  That  your  advice  is  to  her,  that  she 
quit  my  house,  that  she  persevere  in  demanding  my  consent  to  so 
doing,  and  that  she  join  and  give  herself,  and  whatever  income  or 
property  she  may  have,  to  an  establishment,  at  or  near  East  Grin- 
stead,  or  some  other  similar  establishment ;  and,  under  your 
guidance  and  tutelage,  there  to  resign  her  will,  her  person,  her 
services,  her  property,  to  your  or  others'  will  and  pleasure. 

"  6.  That  in  the  prosecution  of  these  designs  you  have  never 
made  one  word  of  communication  to  me,  her  natural  parent,  the 
guide  of  her  youth,  and  constituted  spiritual  pastor ;  that  the  whole 
is  clandestinely  and  surreptitiously  carried  on  and  continued  now 
by  letter  during  her  absence  from  home,  to  the  injury  of  my  family 
peace  and  to  the  infringement  of  my  public  rights. 

"  I  make  these  charges  distinctly  and  deliberately,  and  I  ask  for 
your  distinct  and  definite  reply."  ^ 

Mr.  Neale  formally  acknowledged  the  receipt  of  Mr. 
Scobell's  letter,  stating  that  he  declined  replying  to  his 
questions,  although  his  silence  was  not  to  be  taken  as 
an  acquiescence  in  the  correctness  of  his  statements,  but 
as  taken  from  motives  "of  the  most  friendly  character 
towards"  Mr.  Scobell. 

The  facts  of  the  case  were  not  made  public  until  the 
following  December,  after  the  funeral  of  Mr.  Scobell's 
daughter,  who  died  at  St.  Margaret's,  East  Grinstead, 
from  fever,  on  November  13,  1857,  after  she  had  been  a 
Sister  there  for  a  few  months.  Great  indignation  was  felt 
at  Lewes  when  some  of  the  circumstances  became  known, 
immediately  after  the  young  lady's  death,  and  with  the 
result  that  at  her  funeral,  on  November  i8th — which  took 
place  at  Lewes — something  approaching  to  a  riot  took 
place.  At  the  conclusion  of  the  funeral  service,  the  body 
having  been  buried  in  a  vault  within  the  Church,  a  dis- 

^  The  Rev.  J.  M.  Neale  and  the  Institute  of  St.  Margaret's,  East  Grinstead. 
Statement  by  the  Rev.  J.  Scobell,  p.  9.     London  :  Nisbet  &  Co.     1857. 


THE    LEWES    RIOTS  365 

graceful  attack  was  made  upon  Mr.  Neale  and  the  Sisters 
of  Mercy  who  accompanied  him.  Amid  cries  of  "  No 
Popery,"  Mr.  Neale  was  knocked  down,  and  parts  of  the 
dresses  of  the  Sisters  were  torn  off,  the  whole  party  from 
East  Grinstead  being  hustled  about  by  the  mob,  until 
rescued  by  the  police.  Such  conduct  on  the  part  of  the 
Protestants  was,  I  believe,  wholly  without  excuse,  and  was 
a  disgrace  to  the  cause  it  was  ostensibly  got  up  to  promote. 
There  was  grave  cause  for  public  indignation,  but  not  for 
mob  violence  on  defenceless  women. 

About  three  weeks  after  this  riot  Mr.  Scobell  published 
the  pamphlet  containing  the  six  charges  against  Mr.  Neale, 
which  I  have  quoted  above.  Meanwhile  Mr.  Scobell  had 
received  from  the  Bishop  of  Chichester  a  letter  of  sympathy, 
dated  November  22nd: — "You  may,"  wrote  his  lordship, 
"  be  well  assured  of  the  deep-felt  sympathy  of  every  upright 
candidly  religious  man.  I  beg  to  offer  you  and  your  family 
the  sincere  expression  of  mine  and  Mrs.  Gilbert's.  I  have 
felt  it  my  duty  to  write  to  the  Lady  Superioress  and  the 
Society  of  St.  Margaret's  at  East  Grinstead,  the  letter,  with 
a  copy  of  which  I  thus  briefly  intrude  upon  your  sorrows. 
He  must  be  heartless  who  could  have  permitted  himself  to 
add  to  them  as  that  infatuated  man  from  East  Grinstead 
has  done  "  ^  (that  is,  Mr.  Neale).  To  the  Mother  Superior 
of  the  Sisterhood  the  Bishop  wrote  as  follows  : — 

Palace,  Chichester,  Nov.  21,  1857. 
"  Madam, — Your  Society  was  first  formed  as  an  association  of 
ladies,  who  should  engage  thtmselves  and  train  others  to  minister 
to  the  bodily  wants  of  their  fellow-Christians,  by  nursing  them  in 
sickness.  Such  an  institution  I  regarded  as  praiseworthy  and 
Christian  in  its  object,  and  I  authorised  the  use  of  my  name  in  con- 
nection with  it.  It  has  for  some  time  past  submitted  itself  to  the 
unlimited  influence  of  Mr.  Neale,  a  clergyman,  in  whose  views  and 
practices  it  is  well  known  I  have  no  confidence.  Especially  it  is 
well  known  that  I  deny  that  the  Church  of  England  sanctions  the 
habitual  practice  of  Confession.  She  acknowledges  it  only  in  rare 
and  exceptional  cases,  and  Mr.  Neale  is  unwarranted  in  using  it  in 

^  The  Rev.  J.  M.  Neale  and  the  Institute  of  St.  Margarefs,  East  Grinstead, 
Statement  by  the  Rev.  J.  Scobell,  p.  13.  The  Lewes  Riots.  A  Letter  to  the 
Bishop  of  Chichester.  By  the  Rev.  J.  M.  Neale,  p.  36,  5th  edition.  London  : 
Masters.     1857. 


366  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

the  frequent  and  regular  way  in  which  he  applies  it.  Those  who 
admit  such  application  of  it  to  themselves,  manifest  thereby  the 
inadequacy  of  their  direct  faith  in  Christ's  promises.  Their  resort 
to  this  unauthorised  remedy,  by  a  righteous  retribution,  issues  in  a 
continuous  increase  of  weakness,  and  an  accumulation  of  obstruc- 
tions in  the  way  of  the  true  influences  of  grace  upon  their  hearts. 
They  trust  more  and  more  in  man,  and  are  less  and  less  able, 
without  man,  to  hope  in  Christ,  i.e.  truly  hope  in  Him.  I  desire, 
therefore,  that  henceforth  neither  you  nor  any  of  your  Sisterhood 
will  state  that  I  approve  of,  or  have  any  connection  with,  your 
Institution  and  Sisterhood  of  S.  Margaret's.  I  desire  that  any 
circulars  or  printed  copies  of  your  rules  in  which  my  name  is 
introduced,  may  be  cancelled  and  not  used  with  my  name  in  future. 
Whatever  expense  is  brought  upon  the  Institution  by  the  consequent 
loss  of  the  copies  you  may  have  by  you,  I  will  fully  repay. — I  remain. 
Madam,  your  faithful  Pastor, 

(Signed)         "A.  T.  Cicestr. 
"  Miss  Greame,  or  the  Lady  Superioress 
of  S.  Margaret's,  East  Grinstead." 

On  Sunday,  November  29th,  Mr.  Scobell  preached  in 
All  Saints'  Church,  Lewes,  a  special  sermon  on  the  treat- 
ment his  deceased  daughter  had  received  at  the  hands  of 
Mr.  Neale,  in  the  course  of  which  he  announced  his  inten- 
tion to  publish  a  narrative  of  what  had  taken  place.  On 
December  3rd  the  Mother  Superior  of  St.  Margaret's  Con- 
vent appeared  at  the  door  of  the  Palace  of  the  Bishop  of 
Chichester,  and  sent  in  a  letter  requesting  an  interview. 
This  document  has  the  appearance  of  having  been  written 
under  dread  of  Mr.  Scobell's  forthcoming  pamphlet.  It 
was,  in  fact,  a  threatening  letter,  evidently  written  in  the 
hope  of  frightening  the  Bishop  into  using  his  influence 
to  prevent  Mr.  Scobell  publishing  his  exposure.  "  Mr. 
Neale,"  wrote  the  Mother  Superior  to  the  Bishop,  in  the 
letter  which  she  handed  in  at  the  door,  "is  extremely 
anxious  to  spare  the  feelings  of  that  unhappy  parent,  and 
he  hoped  that  after  1  had  seen  you,  an  arrangement  would 
be  made  by  which  the  public  might  be  disabused  of  their 
false  impressions  without  an  exposure  in  the  papers."  ^  I  do 
not  wonder  that  the  Bishop  refused  to  see  a  lady  who 
brought  him  such  a  threatening  letter.     But  he  wrote  her 

1  The  Lewes  Riots.     By  the  Rev.  J.  M.  Neale,  p.  37. 


A  priest's  clandestine  correspondence      367 

a  letter,  which  has  not  been  published,  to  which  the 
Mother  Superior  sent  a  rude  and  sneering  reply.  On 
December  2nd  Mr.  Neale  himself  wrote  to  the  Bishop, 
expressing  a  hope  that  he  would  not  compel  him,  "  in 
absolute  self-defence,  to  expose  Mr.  Scobell."  ^  But  the 
Bishop  would  not  yield,  so  in  a  letter,  bearing  date  De- 
cember 4,  1857,  Mr.  Neale  published  his  "exposure" 
of  Mr.  Scobell.  In  this  pamphlet  Mr.  Neale  quotes  nume- 
rous documents,  amongst  them  being  one  he  wrote  to  Miss 
Scobell,  on  January  21,  1855,  containing  the  following 
statement  : — "  I  should  advise  you  to  act  thus.  To  tell 
your  father  (perhaps  it  would  be  better  to  write  it)  that, 
while  you  shall  always  be  ready  to  go  to  the  very  furthest 
length  you  can  in  obeying  him,  there  are  some  points  on 
which  you  feel  that  you  have  a  higher  duty.  That  you  feel 
that  you  need  that  counsel  from  a  priest,  and  that  Absolu- 
tion which  the  Church  clearly  allows  you  to  have  ;  that 
you  intend,  however  painful  it  must  be  to  disobey  him,  to 
avail  yourself  of  it."  2  On  February  22,  1855,  he  wrote  to 
her  : — "  I  cannot  feel  happy  about  the  state  in  which 
matters  stand  as  regards  your  father.  It  is  a  sad  necessity 
(if  it  be  a  necessity)  for  me  to  write,  as  this  letter  must  be 
sent,  under  cover,  to  a  third  person."  ^  Again,  on  the 
following  November  27th  he  wrote  to  her  : — "  This  kind 
of  correspondence  ought  not  to  go  on,  because  it  is  in 
your  power  to  end  it.  Only  be  firm  now,  only  insist  on 
an  answer,  and  one  way  or  the  other  it  will  be  terminated. 
I  never  direct  to  you  under  cover  to  Miss  Parker  \\'ithout 
pain."  It  may  have  caused  him  pain,  but  he  continued 
to  do  it.  The  Miss  Parker  here  mentioned  was  Mr. 
Scobell's  Infant  Schoolmistress.  These  letters,  from  which 
I  have  just  quoted  (published  by  Mr.  Neale  himself),  fully 
prove  Mr.  Scobell's  charge  against  him  of  "carrying  on, 
by  letter,  under  cover  to  the  Mistress  of  my  Infants' 
School,  a  clandestine  correspondence  with  my  daughter 
while  in  my  house."  Mr.  Neale  did  not  dare  to  deny  that 
he  had  "secret  meetings"  with  Miss  Scobell  in  her  father's 
Infant  School  House,  or  that  he  there,  vested  in  surplice, 

^  The  Lewes  Riots.     By  the  Rev.  J.  M.  Neale,  p.  39. 
^  Ibid,  p.  10.  ^  Ibid.  p.  10. 


368  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

clandestinely  heard  her  Confessions,  and  never  wrote  a 
word  himself  to  her  father  about  it.  Not  until  two  years 
after  her  first  Confession  did  Miss  Scobell's  father  know  the 
name  of  her  Father  Confessor,  and  even  then  not  through 
her  action,  or  that  of  Mr.  Neale,  but  through  a  penitent 
letter  from  Miss  M.  B.  Parker,  the  Infant  Schoolmistress. 
She  wrote  to  her  Rector  on  February  10,  1857,  to  acknow- 
ledge her  double  dealing  : — "  I  have  for  a  long  time,"  she 
said,  "  been  labouring  under  the  weight  of  an  evil  con- 
science, inasmuch  as  I  promised  to  be  faithful  to  the  trust 
placed  in  me  by  yourself  with  reference  to  one  of  your 
family.  Out  of  kindness  to  Miss  Scobell,  I  have  been 
induced  to  allow  her  the  use  of  my  sitting-room,  to  meet 
a  person  [Mr.  Neale]  whom  I  never  before  saw  in  my 
life  ;  and  what  is  more  I  deceived  you  in  this  thing,  in 
that  I  ought  to  have  told  you,  but  I  did  not  see  the  harm 
in  it  then,  but  I  have  since,  and  do  now,  to  my  sorrow."  ^ 
On  the  receipt  of  this  letter  Mr.  Scobell  at  once  wrote  to 
Mr.  Neale  the  letter  containing  the  six  charges  quoted 
above. 

And  what,  it  will  be  asked,  was  Mr.  Neale's  defence  ; 
what  were  the  charges  which  he,  in  return,  had  to  bring 
against  Mr.  Scobell  ?  Briefly,  it  was  that  he  and  the  Sisters 
of  Mercy  who  had  enticed  Miss  Scobell  into  the  Sisterhood, 
were  justified  in  doing  so,  because  Mr.  Scobell  had  been 
tyrannical  and  unkind  to  his  daughter.  But  on  looking 
through  the  evidence  produced,  I  find  that  the  supposed 
tyranny  consisted  in  a  firm  refusal  to  give  his  consent  to 
his  daughter  going  to  Confession,  or  becoming  a  Sister  of 
Mercy.  And  why  should  he  be  compelled  to  give  his  con- 
sent, against  both  his  reason  and  his  conscience  ?  He  was 
a  decided  Protestant,  and  conscientiously  he  believed  that 
Auricular  Confession  and  the  Conventual  life  would  not 
be  for  the  spiritual  benefit  of  his  child.  There  was  elo- 
quence, faithfulness,  and  true  fatherly  affection  in  his  letter 
to  his  daughter,  on  December  8,  1855,  giving  her  his  refusal 
to  sanction  her  conduct  in  going  to   Confession  to    Mr. 

^  77^1?  Jiez'.  /.  M.  Neale  and  the  Institute  of  St  Margaret'' s,  East  Grinstead, 
By  the  Rev.  J.  Scobell,  p.  8. 


A  father's  faithful  letter  369 

Neale,  of  which  he  had  just  heard  from  her,  though  he  did 
not  for  long  after  know  the  name  of  her  Confessor: — 

"  It  is,"  he  wrote  to  her,  "  my  duty  to  tell  you  this,  even  if  you 
give  me  an  unwilling  ear.  You  shall  not  sin  in  ignorance.  But  the 
question  to  myself  is — can  I  bear  it  ?  For  almost  thirty  years,  God 
knows,  I  have  lived  for  my  children — so  did  their  mother.  There 
was  nothing  we  would  not  have  denied  ourselves  and  borne  for  them. 
But  there  are  things  which  man  or  woman  cannot  resolve — cannot 
effect.  I  do  not  feel  it  to  be  in  my  power  to  promise  to  bear  what 
you  now  propose  to  me.  For  me  to  live  at  home  without  family 
privacy — to  live  in  fear  and  subjection  to  another  man — to  live  in 
the  bondage  of  distrust — to  fear  or  to  think  it  possible,  that  my  own 
words,  my  private  thoughts,  my  most  unguarded  actions,  if  they 
relate  to  you,  are  noting  down,  to  be  laid  at  the  feet  of  another  man 
by  my  kneeling,  captive,  misdoing  daughter  !  and  this,  a  proposal,  not 
for  a  week,  for  a  month,  but  for  years,  and  for  life  !  'Tis  more  than 
I  can  promise  to  bear  and  endure  with  patience,  with  contentment, 
with  reconciliation,  with  fulness  of  family  love.  ...  Be  wise,  my 
dear  Emily,  in  time.  Retrace  your  steps.  You  have  begun  to  do 
so  in  small  things,  advance  upon  greater.  ...  I  must  not  write 
more  ;  my  heart  yearns  to  you.  Dismiss  '  secrets '  and  secrecy ; 
never  did  good  come  of  them  when  interrupting  the  natural  love 
between  father  and  child,  husband  and  wife.  Increase  and  renew 
your  confidence.  Put  away  jealousy  and  pride  and  every  insubor- 
dinate temper  and  practice,  and  seek  without  pain  and  without 
mortification  to  be  loving  and  amiable,  faithful  and  obedient.  Do 
this  ;  pray  for  this  ;  obtain  this,  and  all  will  be  well.  God  will 
sanctify  everything  to  your  use  and  improvement.  Be  strong  in 
faith,  and  you  shall  subdue  these  mountains.  Be  in  spiritual  bond- 
age to  no  man.  Live  in  patience  and  godly  resolution,  and  be 
willing  in  your  own  sphere,  and  your  own  proper  calling,  to  take 
up  your  cross  daily,  and  follow  the  Lamb  whither  He  goeth."  ^ 

Is  this,  I  ask,  the  letter  of  a  tyrant,  a  cruel  and  unfeeling 
father  ?  Rather  is  it  not  full  of  affection  and  anxiety  for 
the  welfare  of  a  beloved  daughter  ?  It  is  certainly  decided. 
Mr.  Scobell  was,  undoubtedly,  a  firm  man,  and  it  may  be 
that  from  time  to  time  he  manifested  the  irritability  of 
firm  men.  He  had  to  deal  with  a  daughter  who,  being  in 
her  early  childhood  an  invalid,  had  been  petted  and  made 

^  A  Reply  to  the  Postscript  of  the  Rev.  John  M.   Neale.     By  the  Rev.  J. 
Scobell,  p.  8.     London  :  Nisbet.     1858. 

2  A 


370  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

much  of  by  her  affectionate  father.  When  other  children 
came  he  divided  his  love  with  them,  with  the  result  that  this 
one  became  peevish,  jealous,  and  often  sulky.  Mr.  Neale 
further  pleaded,  in  self-defence,  that  he  had  urged  Miss 
Scobell  to  tell  her  father  that  she  had  been  to  Confession. 
Just  so.  He  was  quite  willing  that  she  should  bear  the 
brunt  of  her  father's  displeasure  ;  but  he  took  good  care, 
so  far  as  he  could,  to  keep  himself  safe  from  her  father's 
wrath.  There  was  nothing  very  courageous  in  this.  On 
this  point,  it  may  be  well  to  cite  here  the  testimony  of  three 
trustworthy  witnesses.  The  first  is  that  of  Hannah  Potter, 
who  made  a  special  declaration  on  the  subject,  dated 
December  ii,  1857,  in  the  course  of  which  she  said  : — 

"Miss  Scobell  first  spoke  to  me  of  Confession  as  applying  to 
some  third  person,  and  asked  my  opinion  of  it.  Afterwards  she  told 
me  it  was  herself,  and  said  Mr.  Neale  had  come  to  her,  and  she  had 
made  one  Confession  to  him.  She  said  it  was  a  very  hard  and  long 
Confession  ;  that  he  said  he  must  know  all  or  he  could  advise  her  in 
nothing.  That  she  had  drawn  up  a  paper  from  four  years  old  and 
upwards,  and  read  it,  as  a  Confession,  to  Mr.  Neale.  That  she  had 
suffered  very  much  in  doing  this  in  body  and  mind,  and  from  the 
questions  arising  out  of  it.  Having  done  this  she  thought  she  had 
done  all.  But  Mn  Neale  said,  '  No !  having  done  thus  much  you 
must  go  on  and  continue  to  confess.'  If  he  would  have  been  satis- 
fied, I  gathered  from  her  that  she  would  rather  not.  She  wished  to 
tell  her  father  all  this.  At  first  Mr.  Neale  made  no  objection  to 
this  being  told  to  her  father;  but  then  he  wrote  atid  forbade  his  fiame 
being  mentioned,  and  that  was  the  reason  why  all  Mr.  Neale's  letters 
were  sent  under  cover  to  the  Infant  Schoolmistress,  and  not  direct  to 
her.  Miss  Scobell  persevered  in  wishing  and  requesting  that  Mr. 
Neale's  tiame  should  be  made  knozvn  to  her  father,  with  all  else  that 
had  occurred.  Mr.  Neale  opposed  that,  and  promised  at  some  future 
time  to  give  the  reason  why,  and  added  that  if  she  did  disclose  his 
name  contrary  to  his  tvishes,  she  might  confess,  but  he  would  not 
absolve  her.  .  .  .  After  this  her  Confessions  went  on  without  inform- 
ing her  father."^ 

It  makes  one  burn  with  indignation  to  thus  witness  this 
cowardly  Father  Confessor  trying  to  suppress  the  honour- 

1  A  Letter  to  the  Rev.  fohn  M.  Neale.  By  the  Rev.  John  Scobell,  p.  lo. 
London:  Nisbet.     1857. 


A    SNAKE    IN    THE    GRASS  37 1 

able  desire  in  this  young  lady's  breast  to  be  open  and  above- 
board  with  her  father.  He  had  to  resort  to  threats  to 
accomplish  his  wishes,  threats  to  withhold  his  absolution, 
which  she  was  not  strong  enough  to  resist.  Why  was  he 
ashamed  and  afraid  to  be  found  out  ?  He  had  no  objection 
to  act  like  a  snake  in  the  grass,  but  he  trembled  with  a 
cowardly  fear  at  exposure  in  the  light  of  day.  And  now  we 
come  to  the  testimony  of  Miss  Parker,  the  Infant  School- 
mistress, dated  December  10,  1857  : — 

"  I  distinctly  remember  Miss  Scobell's  wish  and  desire,  strongly 
expressed  to  me,  that  both  she  and  I  should  make  known  to  her 
father,  the  Revd.  J.  Scobell,  the  fact  of  Mr.  Neale's  visits  to  her  in 
my  sitting-room,  and  of  her  practice  of  Confession  to  him,  and  of 
receiving  Absolution  from  him.  This  was  not  long  after  her  first 
Confession  to  Mr.  Neale.  She  said  she  would  rather  do  this  her- 
self, but  if  that  could  not  be  allowed,  she  wished  I  could  do  it.  She 
said  she  had  made  this  her  desire  known  to  Mr.  Neale,  and  requested 
his  permission  to  do  so,  but  that  Mr.  Neale  positively  forbade  it,  ajid 
threatened  that  if  she  did  so,  he  ivould  not  give  her  Absolution.  She 
would  not  therefore  tell  her  father,  or  allow  me  to  do  so ;  for,  she 
said,  Mr.  Neale's  wish  ought  to  be  her  and  my  wish  also."  ^ 

Early  in  December  1855,  Miss  Scobell  wrote  a  letter  to 
her  father  stating  that  she  had  been  to  Confession,  but 
not  giving  the  name  of  her  Confessor.  She  wrote  this 
letter  in  the  presence  of  Miss  Parker,  and  when  the  father's 
reply  came  back  it  was  sent  on  to  Mr.  Neale  to  read,  who 
at  once,  fearing,  no  doubt,  that  he  would  lose  his  penitent, 
sent  word  that  he  would  come  over  from  East  Grinstead 
to  Lewes  to  see  Miss  Scobell.  Miss  Parker  states  that  when 
Miss  Scobell  heard  from  her  that  her  Father  Confessor  was 
coming  to  see  her — 

"  She  was  very  sorry,  and  cried,  and  said, '  Oh  dear,  he  is  com- 
ing again  !  What  shall  I  do  !  I  suppose  I  must  see  him.'  On 
Friday  the  21st  December  he  did  come,  sent  to  say  he  wished  to 
see  her,  and  they  had  another  long  ijiterview,  from  two  to  half  past 
five  p.m.,  at  my  room.  When  he  went  away  I  went  in,  and  she  was 
weeping  and  in  an  exhausted  state  and  hysterical.  I  was  frightened, 
and  cried  too.     I  made  her  coffee  and  quieted  her.     She  was  not 

1  A  Letter  to  the  Rev.  fohn  M.  Neale.     By  the  Rev.  John  Scobell,    p.  9. 


372  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

able  to  walk  home  alone,  she  shook  so  violently ;  she  could  not 
have  got  along  without  my  arm.  I  went  back  to  tea  and  returned 
again  to  the  Rectory  in  the  course  of  the  evening,  and  sat  with  her 
two  or  three  hours  in  her  bedroom  ;  she  was  very  weak,  and  cried 
again  more  than  once.  She  said  'she  could  not  have  her  own  way 
in  anything.'  She  said 'he  overpowered  her,' and  she  supposed  it 
was  right  to  give  up  her  own  will,  for  she  must  do  as  he  bid  her; 
I  understood  this  to  mean  that  else  (as  before)  he  would  not  give  her 
absolution.  And  thus  I  understood  that  the  hope  of  returning  to  a 
good  understanding  with  her  father  was  given  up  by  her  for  lost.''^ 

Thus  do  these  RituaHstic  Father  Confessors  come  in 
between  daughters  and  their  parents,  and  disturb  the  peace 
of  famiHes,  acquiring  thereby  a  greater  power  in  the  house- 
hold than  is  possessed  by  either  father  or  mother.  Who 
can  wonder  that  when  Mr.  Scobell  came  to  quote  this  last 
declaration  of  Miss  Parker,  in  his  published  Letter  to  the 
Rev.  John  M.  Neale,  he  should  comment  on  it  in  the  follow- 
ing righteously  indignant  terms  : — "  This  w^is  the  oppression 
that  was  intolerable — an  evil  angel  had  stepped  in  and  the 
waters  were  as  troubled  as  before.  You  [Mr.  Neale]  were 
an  incubus  which  no  effort  or  cry  of  mine  could  dislodge, 
and  you  truly  say  it  was  possible  I  might,  as  a  last  remedy, 
have  broken  up  my  establishment,  and  gone  to  another 
land  for  refuge.  I  felt  a  stabbing  in  the  dark  !  a  hidden 
voice  replying — another's  eye  lurking — another  hand  guid- 
ing— a  relentless  heart  plotting  against  a  child,  whom  for 
more  than  twenty  years  of  her  short  life  ^  I  had  loved  with 
uninterrupted  and  fullest  affection,  returned  by  her  with  all 
the  ardour  of  an  enthusiastic  temperament.  Oh,  for  the 
love  of  God  and  man  desist — rash  man,  desist — with  all 
who  act  with  you  or  like  you,  and  never  drive  another 
fellow-creature  to  agony  and  desperation  by  your  boasted, 
but  empty,  evil- working,  ungodly  *  Confessions.'  "  ^ 

As  to  the  third  witness,  another  daughter  of  Mr.  Scobell,  I 
give  her  testimony  in  the  words  of  her  father  : — "  As  regards 
the  matter  of  'secrecy.'  In  addition  to  what  has  been  al- 
ready said,  I  give  the  testimony  of  a  daughter.    She  has  often 

'  A  Letter  to  the  Rev.  /ohii  M.  Neale.     By  the  Rev.  John  Scobell,  p.  17. 

"^  Miss  Scobell  was  27  at  her  death. 

'^  A  Letter  to  the  Rev.  John  M.  Neale.     By  the  Rev.  John  Scobell,  p.  17. 


THE    CONFESSIONAL    AND    MONEY  373 

heard  her  deceased  sister  say,  that  the  reason  why  she  so 
often  refused  her  father  the  name  of  her  guide,  was  the  un- 
willingness of  that  unknown  gentleman  to  have  his  name 
mentioned  ;  and  that  her  sister  believed  the  reason  to  be 
his  dread  of  the  further  displeasure  of  the  Bishop."  ^ 

There  was  one  statement  in  the  fifth  section  of  Mr. 
Scobell's  indictment  of  Mr.  Neale  which  he  was  unable  to 
prove.  It  was  contained  in  these  words  : — "And  give  her- 
self and  whatever  income  and  property  she  may  have,  to 
an  establishment  at  or  near  East  Grinstead."  I  happen  to 
know  that  one  of  the  rules  of  the  Sisterhood  at  that  time 
was  that  a  Sister  was  not  compelled  to  give  all  her  property 
to  the  Sisterhood.  Before  entering  the  Convent,  Miss 
Scobell  promised  three  of  her  relatives  that  she  would  not 
leave,  by  will,  any  of  her  property  to  the  St.  Margaret's 
Sisterhood  ;  it  should  only  have  her  annual  income  during 
her  life.  But  on  her  deathbed  she  made  a  will  giving  the 
Sisterhood  ;^40o  (the  rest  she  gave  to  a  brother),  and  mak- 
ing Mr.  Neale  and  the  Mother  Superior  her  sole  executors, 
instead  of  her  father.  Mr.  Neale  declared  that  he  in  no  way 
interfered  in  the  matter  of  making  the  will,  and  was  not 
present  when  it  was  made  by  a  solicitor  who  was  sent  for. 
But  the  question  here  arises,  how  far  was  she  influenced 
in  the  Confessional  ?  Some  of  the  Sisters,  at  least,  were 
certainly  expected  to  mention  the  disposal  of  their  property, 
to  their  Confessors,  in  the  Confessional.  Only  the  year 
after  Miss  Scobell  died,  Mr.  Neale  himself  gave  a  secret 
address  on  the  subject  to  the  Sisterhood,  which  was  subse- 
quently printed  for  their  secret  use,  and  of  which  I  possess 
a  copy: — "A  Sister  coming  to  us,"  said  Mr.  Neale,  "and 
able  to  pay  the  dowry  of  this  House,  is  at  perfect  liberty  to 
dispose  of  the  rest  of  her  money  as  she  pleases,  provided  it 
be  not  on  herself.  She  may  give  it  to  wliom  she  will,  with- 
out mentioning  the  subject  even  in  Confession.  A  Sister 
coming  to  us,  and  not  able  to  pay  any,  or  all,  of  the  dowry 
of  this  House,  is  then  bound  to  mention  in  Confession  why 
not,  and  to  tell  the  Priest  how  she  disposes  of  her  incofne."  ^ 
Here,  then,  is  a  case  in  which  the  priest  uses  the  Con- 

1  A  Reply  to  the  Postscript,  p.  9. 
^  The  Spirit  of  the  Founder,  p.  II. 


374  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

fessional  to  interfere  with  the  money  and  property  of  the 
Sister.  Can  we,  for  one  moment,  suppose  that  this  is  the 
only  case  in  which  it  is  used  for  this  purpose  ?  And  is  there 
not  grave  reason  to  fear  that,  even  outside  of  Convent  walls, 
the  Confessional  is  used  for  the  same  purpose  ? 

I  have  devoted  a  considerable  amount  of  space  to  this 
case,  because  I  am  not  without  hope  that  it  will  serve  as  a 
warning  to  parents,  leading  them  to  keep  a  watchful  eye  on 
the  proceedings  of  any  Father  Confessor  who  may  be  seek- 
ing to  influence  their  daughters. 

The  question  of  Auricular  Confession  was  very  much 
discussed  in  London  and  the  provinces  in  1858,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  Bishop  of  London  (Dr.  Tait)  having  with- 
drawn the  licence  of  the  Rev.  Alfred  Poole,  Curate  of 
St.  Barnabas',  Pimlico,  under  the  Hon.  and  Rev.  Robert 
Liddell,  Vicar  of  St.  Paul's,  Knightsbridge,  the  mother 
parish.  The  licence  was  withdrawn  on  the  ground  that 
Mr.  Poole  had  advocated  systematic  Confession  to  priests, 
and  had  asked  females  improper  questions  on  the  Seventh 
Commandment.  A  statement  of  this  case,  on  behalf  of 
Mr.  Poole,  was  published  in  1864,^  on  which  I  mainly  rely 
for  my  account  of  the  proceedings  and  facts. 

A  formal  complaint  against  Mr.  Poole  was  forwarded  to 
the  Bishop  of  London,  on  February  26,  1858,  by  the  Hon. 
Rev.  F.  Baring,  together  with  the  written  evidence  of  three 
women  who  had  been  to  Confession  to  Mr.  Poole.  The 
Bishop  thereupon  sent  for  the  latter  gentleman,  and  read 
to  him  the  statements  of  the  women.  "  Mr.  Poole,"  says 
the  document  issued  in  his  defence,  "denied  before  the 
Bishop  most  solemnly  that  he  ever  put  to  the  women, 
whose  statements  are  above  referred  to,  or  to  any  persons, 
the  objectionable  questions  contained  in  them,  or  any 
questions  of  a  similar  import ;  and  he  asserted  to  the 
Bishop,  that  the  statements,  so  far  as  they  express  that  he 
did  so,  were  entirely  and  deliberately  false."  ^  At  this 
interview  the  Bishop  questioned  Mr.  Poole  upon  the 
general  subject  of  Confession.     Later  on,  Mr.  Poole  had  a 

^  Afi  Authentic  Statement  a}id  Report  of  the  Case  of  the  Rev.  Alfred  Poole, 
pp.  140.      London  :  Joseph  Masters.     1864. 
'■^  Ibid.  p.  4. 


THE    REV.    A.    POOLE'S    CONFESSIONAL    CASE  375 

second  interview  with  the  Bishop,  who  again  questioned 
him  as  to  his  views  and  practice,  taking  on  this  occasion 
written  notes  of  his  repHes.  The  result  was  that  on  May  8, 
1858,  the  Bishop  wrote  to  Mr.  Poole  : — 

"  While  I  fully  admit  that  the  statements  you  have  made  to  me, 
tend  to  make  me  look  with  much  suspicion  upon  the  particular 
evidence  laid  before  me,  I  regret  to  say,  that  quite  independently  of 
that  evidence,  I  am  led  by  your  own  admissions  to  regard  the  course 
you  are  in  the  habit  of  pursuing,  in  reference  to  Confession,  as  likely 
to  cause  scandal  and  injury  to  the  Cimrch.  I  feel  especially,  that 
this  questioning  of  females  on  the  subject  of  the  violations  of  the 
Seventh  Commandment  is  of  a  dangerous  tendency ;  and  I  am 
convinced,  generally,  that  the  sort  of  systematic  admission  of  your 
people  to  Confession  and  Absolution,  ivhich  you  have  allowed  to  be 
your  practice,  ought  not  to  take  place. 

"  Under  these  circumstances,  I  feel  I  ought  to  mark  my  sense  of 
the  impropriety  of  what  you  describe  as  your  practice,  and  I  shall 
therefore  feel  myself  bound,  though  with  great  pain,  to  withdraw 
your  licence  as  Curate  of  S.  Barnabas',  and  shall  send  you  formal 
notice  accordingly."  ^ 

To  this  letter  Mr.  Poole  replied,  on  May  nth,  asking 
the  Bishop  to  "  point  out  what  are  the  particulars,  either  as 
regards  my  admissions,  to  which  you  refer,  or  anything  I 
have  done,  on  which  your  lordship's  severe  animadversion  is 
founded."  Two  days  later  the  Bishop  answered  : — "  I  have 
already  stated  that  what  I  object  to  in  the  course  which  you 
admitted  to  me'CsxsX  you  pursue,  is,  that  questioning,  especially 
of  females,  on  the  subject  of  violations  of  the  Seventh 
Commandment,  which  seems  to  me  of  very  dangerous 
tendency,  and  a  systematic  admission  of  your  people  to 
Confession  and  Absolution,  going  beyond  anything  con- 
templated by  the  services  or  teaching  of  our  Church."  ^ 
To  this  statement  Mr.  Poole  replied: — "The  only  admis- 
sion I  have  made  upon  this  point  is,  that  1  asked  questions 
in  the  particular  instance  alluded  to,  because  I  was  requested 
by  the  person  to  do  so — knowing  beforehand  that  these  were 
the  very  sins  which  she  came  to  confess.  Am  I  to  under- 
stand  that  your  lordship  condemns  me  without  previous 

1  An  Authentic  Statement  and  Report  of  the   Case  of  the  Rev.  Alfred  Poole, 
p.  6.  2  jhid.  p.  8. 


376  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

advice  or  remonstrance  given  on  so  difficult  a  point  of 
discretion,  in  which  I  am  borne  out  by  the  approval  of  my 
Incumbent,  viz. — that  of  asking  any  questions  on  a  certain 
Commandment,  when  requested  to  do  so  by  the  penitent 
herself,  and  when  the  refusal  to  do  so  might  hinder  the 
penitent  from  '  opening  her  griefs  ?  '"  1  Three  days  later  the 
Bishop  sent  Mr.  Poole  notice  that  unless  he  could  "show 
cause  to  the  contrary  "  either  personally  at  London  House, 
or  "in  writing,"  he  should  at  once  withdraw  his  licence. 
The  accused  preferred  to  show  cause  in  writing,  and  did 
so  in  a  letter  dated  May  21st,  in  which  he  remarked  : — 

"The  ground  upon  which  your  lordship  intimates  your  intention 
to  withdraw  my  licence  is,  that  'admitting  females  to  Confession,  I 
address  to  them  questions  of  a  character  calculated  to  bring  scandal 
on  the  Church.' 

"  This  charge  is  made  in  general  terms,  and  I  do  not  know  in 
what  way  I  can  meet  it,  unless  it  be  by  a  general,  but  a  solemn  and 
entire,  denial  of  its  truth.  I  admit  that  when  persons,  male  or 
female,  have  sought  my  ministry  in  Confession,  I  have  put  to  them 
such  questions  as  have  been  suggested  by  the  matters  confessed, 
which  have  appeared  to  me  necessaiy,  in  order  to  enable  me  to  give 
the  'counsel  and  advice'  which  the  case  required.  But  I  solemnly 
assert  that  I  have  never  put  any  questions  of  a  nature,  or  in  a 
manner,  or  in  language  'calculated  to  bring  scandal  on  the  Church,' 
or  otherwise,  than  was  calculated  to  assist  the  penittnt,  and  to 
enable  him  or  her  to  receive  more  effectually  the  consolation  or 
advice  which,  as  the  minister  of  the  church,  it  was  my  duty  to 
impart."  - 

Mr.  Poole  concluded  by  demanding,  as  of  right,  "that 
my  accusers  may  be  brought  before  me,  and  that  I  may 
meet  them  face  to  face,  and  be  allowed  such  assistance 
as  I  may  require  for  my  defence  ;  and  for  this  purpose 
I  request  your  lordship  to  allow  me  to  be  furnished  with 
a  statement  in  writing  of  the  particular  charges  which  I 
may  be  required  to  meet."  As  a  matter  of  fact,  Mr,  Poole 
had  already,  as  we  have  seen,  been  furnished  by  the 
Bishop  with  a  written  statement  of  charges,  and  as  to 
the  other  demands  the  Counsel  for  the  Bishop,  when  the 

■^  An  Authentic  Statement  and  Report  of  the  Case  of  the  Rev.  Alfred  Poole, 
p.  10.  ^  Ibid.  p.  12. 


QUESTIONING    WOMEN    IN    THE    CONFESSIONAL       377 

case  was  being  subsequently  heard  before  the  Archbishop, 
said  : — "  It  had  been  asked,  why  was  not  Mr.  Poole  afforded 
the  opportunity  of   showing   that   the   statements    of    the 
witnesses  were  untrue,  and  putting  a  different  complexion  on 
the  matter  ?      Now,  as  there  were  no  persons  present  but 
Mr.  Poole  and  the  women,  Mr.  Poole  was  the  only  person 
who   could   reply   to   their    statements ;    and    the    Bishop 
handed   the    depositions   to    Mr.    Poole,   who    made   such 
comments  upon  them  as  he  thought  desirable  ;  and  these 
comments  and  the  admissions  made  by  Mr.  Poole  himself 
were,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Bishop,  inconsistent  with  the 
law  and  practice  of  the    Church,  and  quite  sufficient   to 
show  that  Mr.   Poole  had  been  guilty  of  grievous   indis- 
cretion in  the  performance  of  the  duties  of  his  office."  ^ 
The  Bishop,  in  his  letter  of  May  8th,  had  practically  cast 
off  the  evidence  of  the  women  witnesses,  and  had  only 
acted  on  it  so  far  as  it  had  been  confirmed  by  Mr.  Poole 
himself.    As  to  one  of  these  witnesses,  the  Bishop's  Counsel 
said  : — "  With  respect  to  the  questions  which  the  woman 
stated  to  have  been  put  to  her,  he  did  not  ask  the  Court  to 
believe  anything  further  than  the  admissions  of  Mr.  Poole 
himself  on  that  subject."  ^     And  again,  the  Counsel  said  : — 
"  His  learned  friends  had  stated  their  inability  to  discover 
whether  the  Bishop  had  acted  upon  a  belief  of  the  evidence 
of  these  women.     This  seemed  rather  unfair  towards  the 
Bishop,  when  he  stated  that  he  was  acting  on  Mr.  Poole's 
own  admissions,  and  when  it  was  perfectly  clear  that  he 
was  only  acting  on  their  evidence  so  far  as  it  was  confirmed 
by   Mr.   Poole  himself.     The   Bishop,  therefore,  was  not 
acting  on   conflicting,   but  on   concurrent  testimony,  and 
surely  Mr.  Poole  had  ?io  right  to  complain  of  being  judged  on 
statements  which  he  was  not  prepared  to  denyT  ^     From  his 
first  interview  with   Mr.   Poole  the   Bishop  had  accepted 
fully  his  denial  that  he  had  ever  put  to  the  women  the 
particular    questions   specified.       His    lordship    could    not 
well  have  acted  otherwise,  for  the  women  were  persons  of 
notoriously  immoral  character,  whose  evidence  could  not 

^  An  Authentic  Statement  and  Report  of  the  Case  of  the  Rev,  Alfred  Pool 

P-  73- 

2  Ibid.  p.  75.  3  /^/^_  p_  77_ 


378  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

be  accepted  by  itself.  And  therefore  he  relied  on  what  the 
counsel  termed  "  the  admissions  of  Mr.  Poole  himself."  It 
is  important  and  right  to  bear  in  mind  that  throughout  the 
whole  of  the  proceedings  no  charge  was  brought  by  the 
Bishop  or  any  one  else,  against  Mr.  Poole  himself,  nor  was 
it  suggested  in  any  way  that  he  had  acted  from  evil  or 
prurient  motives.  On  the  contrary,  writing  to  the  Church- 
wardens of  St.  Barnabas'  on  June  24,  1858,  in  reply  to  an 
address  in  favour  of  Mr.  Poole,  sent  by  the  Communicants, 
his  lordship  emphatically  said  : — "  I  beg  to  thank  you  for 
the  opportunity  you  have  given  me  of  stating  that  I  fully 
believe  him  to  be  a  conscientious  and  upright  man."^ 

If  I  be  asked  why  I  devote  so  much  space  to  this  par- 
ticular case,  1  reply  that  I  do  so  because  of  its  importance 
in  the  present  day,  when  the  Confessional,  in  its  most 
objectionable  form,  is  far  more  prevalent  than  it  was  in 
1858 ;  and  the  evil  complained  of — questioning  women  on 
the  Seventh  Commandment — far  greater  than  ever  before. 
In  this  particular  case,  when  disguise  was  no  longer 
available,  it  was  thrown  off ;  the  fact  that  women  were 
questioned  in  this  way  by  Puseyite  Confessors  was  un- 
blushingly  avowed,  and  actually  defended  by  one  of  Mr. 
Poole's  Counsel,  in  the  Archbishop's  Court.  A  meeting  of 
the  Communicants  of  St.  Barnabas'  was  held  on  June  29th, 
at  which  it  was  unanimously  resolved  to  send  to  the  Bishop 
a  letter  on  this  case  of  Mr.  Poole,  which,  amongst  others, 
contained  the  following  statement : — 

"  It  is  true  also  that  in  your  correspondence  you  specify  as 
objectionable  Mr.  Poole's  questioning  of  females  admitted  to  Con- 
fession; but  this  also  is  manifestly  only  a  general  charge,  and  it 
appears  to  us  that  the  propriety  or  impropriety  of  such  a  practice 
must  depend  on  the  prior  and  larger  one,  of  the  propriety  of  Con- 
fession altogether.  For  if  the  practice  of  Confession  be,  as  we  hold 
it  is,  the  Right  of  the  People,  which  the  clergy  may  not  refuse  when 
'any  come  to '  them  for  it,  then  it  cannot  be  more  improper  to  question 
them  upon  the  violation  of  the  Seve?tth  than  of  a?iy  of  the  other 
Conwiandments  ;  or,  to  questio?i  females  upon  it,  if  they  present  them- 
selves for  Confession,  than  males ."'^ 

1  An  Authentic  Statement  and  Report  of  the  Case  of  the  Rev  Alfred  Pooler 
P-  20.  2  ji^j^^  p_  21. 


QUESTIONING    ON    THE    SEVENTH    COMMANDMENT       379 

This  is  plain  speech,  at  any  rate,  and  I  trust  that  it  will 
not  be  forgotten.  It  was  the  best  argument  which  could 
be  devised  in  defence  of  Mr.  Poole's  conduct ;  and  the 
only  wonder  is  that  the  Communicants  were  not  ashamed 
to  make  it.  Mr.  Poole's  Vicar,  the  Hon.  and  Rev.  Robert 
Liddell,  agreed  with  them  on  this  point.  In  his  published 
letter  to  the  Bishop  of  London,  he  wrote  as  follows : — 

"Your  lordship  has  stated,  in  your  condemnation  of  Mr.  Poole, 
that  you  consider  the  questioning,  especially  of  females,  on  the 
subject  of  violations  of  the  Seventh  Commandment,  to  be  of  very 
dangerous  tendency.  Putting  aside,  as  denied  by  Mr.  Poole,  and 
not  yet  [August  1858]  proven,  the  particular  questions  with  which 
he  was  charged,  I  most  readily  admit  the  difficulty  of  this  part  of 
our  duty,  the  need  of  much  prayer  and  self-discipline,  and  the  great 
impropriety,  nay,  sin,  on  the  part  of  the  Confessor,  of  asking  any 
questions  on  this  Commandment,  which  do  not  strictly  arise  out 
of  matters  confessed,  or  out  of  the  circumstances  of  the  penitent, 
otherwise  known  to  him  ;  because  his  duty  is  simply  to  aid  the 
penitent  in  an  unreserved  Confession  of  past  acts  of  sin,  not  to  suggest 
fresh  evil. 

"  I  hope  I  may  be  permitted  to  consider  that  this  is  your  lord- 
ship's general  meaning ;  for  I  cannot  conceive  your  lordship  to 
imply  that  God's  ministers  are  to  be  more  silent  upon  one  part  of 
His  holy  law  than  upon  another ;  or  that  sinners'  consciences  are  to 
be  least  probed  upon  that  Commandment,  which,  in  spirit  and  in 
letter,  is,  by  general  admission,  most  violated."  ^ 

This,  of  course,  was  a  defence  of  asking  questions  in 
Confession  on  the  Seventh  Commandment,  whether  of  men 
or  women,  though  with  great  care  on  the  part  of  the 
Confessor.  Protestant  Churchmen  strongly  object  to  any 
questions  whatever  being  put  in  Confession  on  such  a 
subject,  to  persons  of  an  opposite  sex.  It  is  an  unmitigated 
evil,  though,  as  we  have  seen,  defended  and  glorified  in  by 
the  Puseyites.  Even  Mr.  Coleridge,  in  his  speech  for  Mr. 
Poole  before  the  Archbishop,  defended  the  objectionable 
practice.     He  said  : — 

"  If  a  person  wished  to  confess,  the  Scriptural  course  [Where  is 
there  '  Scriptural '  authority  for  confessing  to  priests  ?]  was  to  place 

^  A  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  London  On  Confession  and  Absolution,  with  Special 
Reference  to  the  Case  of  the  Rev.  Alfred  Look,  By  the  Hon.  and  Rev.  Robert 
Liddell,  p.  26.     London  :  J.  T.  Hayes.     1838. 


380  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

the  precepts  of  the  Decalogue  before  him,  and  ask  him  to  examine 
himself  upon  those  precepts.  In  that  case  must  the  Seventh 
Commandment  be  omitted?  Where  was  the  authority  to  be  found 
for  such  an  omission  ?  He  admitted  the  delicacy  of  the  case,  and 
that  a  prurient  person  ought  to  be  scouted  out  of  society;  but,  ad- 
milting  the  bona-fides  of  the  person  administering  the  Confession, 
where  was  the  authority  for  leaving  out  one  Commandment  more 
than  another?  If  Confession  was  to  be  anything  more  than  a  mere 
mockery,  //  was  impossible  to  avoid  going  into  those  very  questions 
respecting  which  the  penitent  was  seeking  rehef  and  assistance."^ 

The  Bishop  formally  withdrew  Mr.  Poole's  licence  on 
May  25,  1858,  who  thereupon  appealed  to  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury.  This  was  done,  says  Archbishop  Tait's 
biographer,  "with  the  Bishop's  entire  approval,  and  even 
encouragement."  -  The  Archbishop,  unfortunately,  gave 
his  decision  without  a  formal  hearing  of  Mr.  Poole,  and 
confirmed  the  decision  of  the  Bishop  of  London  on  July  9th. 
On  this  Mr.  Poole  applied  to  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench 
for  a  mandamus  to  compel  the  Archbishop  to  hear  him.  In 
this  he  was  successful,  and  as  a  result  the  case  was  heard  by 
his  Grace  on  February  18  and  19,  1859,  Dr.  Lushington,  as 
Dean  of  Arches,  being  his  Assessor.  Counsel  were  heard 
on  both  sides  at  considerable  length,  and  on  March  23, 
1859,  Dr.  Lushington  delivered,  at  Lambeth  Palace,  his 
report  on  the  case  as  Assessor,  after  which  the  Archbishop 
gave  his  judgment  in  the  following  terms  : — 

"  With  the  able  assistance  of  my  learned  Assessor,  I  have  given 
the  merits  and  circumstances  of  this  Appeal  my  most  serious  and 
careful  consideration.  I  am  of  opinion  that  the  proved  and 
admitted  allegations  afford  in  the  language  of  the  Statute  good  and 
reasoral'le  cause  for  the  revocation  of  this  licence,  and  that  the 
Lord  Bishop  of  Lor.don  has  exercised  a  sound  discretion  in  revoking 
the  same. 

"And  I  am  further  of  opinion  that  the  course  pursued  by  the 
Appellant  is  not  in  accordance  with  tlie  Rubric  or  doctrine  of  the 
Church  of  England,  but  most  dangerous  and  likely  to  produce  most 
serious  mischief  to  the  cause  of  morality  and  religion."^ 

These  two  spiritual  authorities  having  dealt  with    Mr. 

^  An  Authentic  Statement,  pp.  69,  70. 
^  Life  of  Archbishop  Tait,  vol.  i.  p.  224. 
^  An  Authentic  Statement,  p.  95. 


THE    LAVINGTON    CASE  38 1 

Poole's  case,  and  having  decided  it  against  him,  the  incon- 
sistent Puseyites  at  once  determined  to  appeal  to  what  they 
considered  a  purely  State  Court,  the  Judicial  Committee  of 
Privy  Council,  in  the  hope  that  it  would  upset  the  decision 
of  the  Archbishop's  Spiritual  Court.  When  the  State  is 
willing  to  put  down  the  Protestant  cause,  the  Ritualists  are 
quite  willing  to  support  its  decisions,  but  if  it  dare  to  remove 
one  of  their  pretty  ribbons  from  their  backs,  the  whole 
party  is  up  in  arms  directly,  protesting  with  all  their  power 
against  the  State's  audacious  profanity.  The  fact  is  the 
Ritualists  hate  and  oppose  every  Court,  spiritual  or  State, 
and  every  authority,  which  dares  to  contradict  and  condemn 
them,  no  matter  how  guilty  they  may  be.  Mr.  Poole 
appealed  to  the  Judicial  Committee,  but  he  did  so  in  vain. 
After  hearing  arguments  on  both  sides,  their  lordships 
delivered  judgment  on  March  13,  1861,  dismissing  the 
appeal,  and  declaring  that,  by  law,  there  really  was  no 
appeal  against  the  Archbishop's  decision,  which  was  final. 

At  Lavington,  Sussex,  of  which  Cardinal  Manning  was 
once  Rector,  and  of  which  parish  Bishop  Samuel  Wilber- 
force  was  at  the  time  the  Squire  and  Patron,  a  controversy 
broke  out  as  to  the  alleged  Romanising  practices  of  its 
Rector,  the  Rev.  R.  W.  Randall.  The  Rector  had  as  Curate 
the  Rev.  E.  Randall,  who,  though  bearing  the  same  sur- 
name, was  in  no  way  related  to  him.  This  Curate,  though 
a  moderate  High  Churchman,  could  not  approve  of  his 
Rector's  advanced  teaching.  The  National  Standard  of 
August  28,  1858,  in  calling  attention  to  the  controversy 
which  had  arisen,  said : — '*  The  Rector  of  Lavington,  as  we 
learn,  is  a  clergyman  of  the  most  extreme  views.  During 
the  time  that  Mr.  Edward  Randall  was  his  Curate,  he  was 
guilty  of  gross  violations  of  the  Rubric,  and  of  sundry  most 
unchurchmanlike  irregularities.  For  instance,  it  was  his 
habit  to  cross  himself  during  divine  service,  to  make  the 
sign  of  the  Cross  upon  the  water  at  Baptism,  to  mix  water 
with  wine  at  the  Eucharist,  and  to  bow  to  the  elements  after 
consecration.  .  .  .  On  one  occasion  Mr.  E.  Randall,  while 
catechising  the  children  at  the  school,  asked  them  what 
other  name  there  was  for   the   Lord's  Supper  ?     To  his 


382  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

astonishment  they  answered  '  The  Mass.'  Upon  his  remark- 
ing that  that  was  the  name  the  Pope  called  it  by,  they 
informed  him  that  they  had  been  so  taught  by  the  Rector. 
He  then  asked  them  how  many  Sacraments  there  were  ? 
They  answered  '  Seven,'  and  enumerated  the  Romish  Sacra- 
ments. He  called  upon  the  Rector,  and  informed  him  of 
what  the  children  had  said,  and  of  the  manner  in  which  he 
had  corrected  them.  The  Rector  rebuked  him,  and  ex- 
pressed his  determination  to  go  to  the  school,  and  unteach 
the  Curate's  instruction."  Subsequently,  the  Rev.  E.  Ran- 
dall made  a  statement,  asserting  the  above  facts  as  true,  at 
the  office  of  the  Protestant  Defence  Society,  in  the  presence 
of  five  clergymen.^  A  few  days  after  the  above-mentioned 
interview  with  the  Rector,  Mr.  E.  Randall  again  went  into 
the  school,  when  the  schoolmaster  put  into  his  hands  a 
paper,  in  the  Rector's  handwriting,  containing  instruction 
on  the  Seven  Sacraments,  which,  he  said,  had  been  given  to 
him  in  December  1857  by  the  Rector,  in  order  that  its  con- 
tents might  be  taught  by  him  to  the  school  children.  This 
paper  was  as  follows  : — 

"  Baptism. — A  Sacrament  instituted  by  Christ  for  the  spiritual 
regeneration  of  men,  which  is  performed  by  the  washing  of  water, 
with  the  expressed  invocation  of  the  Holy  Trinity. 

"Confirmation. — A  Sacrament  in  which,  by  the  laying  on  of 
hands,  according  to  the  prescribed  form,  fresh  strength  is  given  to 
the  baptized,  that  they  may  believe  firmly,  and  more  constantly  and 
bravely  contend  for  the  faith. 

"  Eucharist. — A  Sacrament  of  the  new  law,  instituted  by  our 
Lord,  for  the  heavenly  nourishment  of  our  souls,  in  which  the  Body 
and  Blood  of  Christ  are  truly  and  really  present  under  the  form  of 
bread  and  wine. 

"  Penance. — A  Sacrament  instituted  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins, 
after  Baptism,  by  the  Absolution  of  the  priest. 

"  Extreme  Unction. — A  Sacrament  of  the  new  law,  consisting 
of  unction  with  oil  and  the  prayer  of  the  priest,  by  which  salvation 
of  the  soul  is  conferred  on  a  Christian  grievously  sick,  and  even 
health  of  the  body,  if  that  be  good  for  the  soul. 

"  Orders. — A  Sacrament  of  the  new  law,  in  which  spiritual 
power  is  given  to  the  ordained. 

^  A  Statement  Respecting  the  Roviish  Doctrines  and  Practices  of  the  Rev.  R.  W, 
Randall.     By  An  English  Churchman,  p.  21.     London  :  Hatchard.     1858. 


THE    LAVINGTON    CASE  383 

"  Matrimony. — A  Sacrament  of  the  new  law,  in  which  a  baptized 
man  and  woman  naturally  give  themselves  each  to  the  other  to  live 
together  continually. 

"  Sacraments. — Outward  ceremonies  instituted  to  give  grace. 

"  Confirmation. — A  Sacrament  given  by  a  Bishop  to  strengthen 
and  confirm  our  faith."  ^ 

The  Curate  sent  this  paper  to  the  Bishop  of  Chichester, 
in  the  absence  from  home  of  his  Rector,  and  was  severely 
censured  by  his  lordship  for  doing  so  without  first  having 
waited  until  he  could  discuss  the  matter  with  his  Rector  on 
his  return  home.  The  Bishop  wrote  to  the  Rector  on  the 
subject,  and  in  a  letter  to  the  Curate  (dated  February  23, 
1858),  declared  himself  satisfied  with  the  Rector's  explana- 
tion. What  that  explanation  was  remained  unknown  to  the 
public  until  September  i6th,  when  the  Rector  wrote  to  the 
Brighton  Gazette  of  that  date: — "The  very  paper  of  notes 
from  which  you  quote  [that  is,  the  document  quoted  above] 
was  intended  to  be  used  in  the  school,  not  by  itself,  but 
together  with  other  more  detailed  papers,  for  the  purpose  of 
showing  what  the  Church  of  England  believes,  and,  at  the 
same  time,  of  guarding  the  children  against  the  Romish 
errors  which  she  has  rejected."  '^  The  extraordinary  docu- 
ment in  question  was  shown  to  be  substantially  a  translation 
into  English  from  Den's  Theology  and  the  Catechism  of  the 
Council  of  Trent.  The  Rector's  letter  to  the  Brighton  Gazette 
brought  a  reply  in  the  next  issue  of  the  same  paper,  dated 
September  i8th,  from  Mr.  H.  R.  Harding,  Choirmaster  of 
Lavington  Church,  in  the  course  of  which  he  said : — 

"  Alarmed  at  this  state  of  things  I  went  [on  February  3rd]  to  the 
Schoolmaster,  who  produced  the  paper  of  which  I  enclose  an  exact 
entire  copy  [see  above].  This  paper,  bearing  plain  evidence  that  it 
was  intended  to  be  taught,  by  the  fact  of  the  five  questionable 
Sacraments  being  repeated,  was  in  the  handwriting  of  the  Rector, 
and  the  Schoolmaster  assured  me  it  had  been  given  to  him  to  be 
taught  in  the  school.  He  was  very  clear,  it  was  the  last  and  only 
paper  he  had  received  from  the  Rector  for  many  months,  and  that 
it  was  not  intended  to  be  modified  by  any  other  paper  or  any  other 
teaching.      He  also  asserted  again  and  again  that  the  words  the 


^  A  Statement  Respecting  the  Romish  Doctrines  and  Practices  of  the  Rev.  R.  W. 
Randall,  pp.  31,  32.  ^  IbiJ.  p.  24. 


384  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Rector  used  on  giving  him  tlie  paper  were,  'The  former  papers 
would  be  a  guide  for  me  in  teaching  the  Sacraments,  but  they  are 
not  sufificiently  expUcit  for  you ;  this  paper  is  what  I  want  you  to 
teach.'  ...  In  the  evening  of  that  day  [February  7th]  the  Rector 
came  to  me,  to  satisfy  my  mind  about  the  paper.  The  Schoolmaster 
was  present.  The  discussion  lasted  a  long  time,  and  the  paper  was 
fully  defended  by  the  Rector,  and  certainly  he  neither  brought  out 
that  the  paper  was  intended  to  have  been  taken  witli  others,  nor  to 
illustrate  the  Church  of  Rome.  At  the  conclusion  of  this  interview, 
the  Rector  said  to  the  Master,  '  If  your  mind  is  not  made  up  to  the 
paper,  I  don't  wish  you  to  teach  it,'  and  asked  for  the  paper."  ^ 

To  this  letter  of  the  Choirmaster,  who  had  resigned  his 
situation  in  consequence  of  the  Rector's  Romanising,  the 
latter  gentleman  made  no  reply,  and  so  far  as  I  can  ascer- 
tain, never  publicly  denied  the  truthfulness  of  the  statements 
it  contained.  The  ex-Choirmaster's  letter  was  followed, 
a  month  later,  by  one  written  to  the  National  Standard^  by 
the  Schoolmaster,  Mr.  William  Marigold,  enclosing  a  letter 
which  he  had  addressed  to  the  Rector,  on  October  21,  1858, 
in  the  course  of  which  he  said  : — 

"  Every  statement  with  reference  to  the  teaching  which  appears 
in  your  letter  to  the  Brighton  Gazette  of  the  i6th  September  I  utterly 
contradict ;  and  every  word  of  Mr.  Harding's  letter  to  the  same 
paper  of  23rd  September,  in  reply  to  yours,  I  fully  confirm  and 
accept  as  my  own. 

"  You  know  well  that  you  did  give  me  that  paper  containing  the 
Seven  Sacraments  to  teach  as  it  stands.  You  know  well  that  you 
used  every  means  to  convince  me  the  paper  as  it  stands  is  consistent 
with  the  Church  of  England's  teaching,  and  that  the  Bishop  had 
accepted  it  as  such.  You  know  well  that  when  I  spoke  to  you  in 
con^equence  of  the  reports  which  were  in  circulation,  that  you  had 
satisfied  the  Bishop  by  telling  his  lorciship  you  had  given  the  paper 
merely  to  show  what  the  Church  of  Rome  teaches,  you  arose  from 
your  scat  pale  and  trembling  with  emotion,  and  exclaimed,  '  That's 
a  lie.'  .  .  . 

"  You  will  perhaps  say  I  am  prompted  to  this  course,  or  that  I 
have  some  prospect  of  advantage  in  it.  'Tis  not  so.  I  have  no 
situation  in  view,  nor  any  place  to  turn  to  when  I  leave  you.  But  I 
will  not  be  a  party  to  such  a  system,  nor  to  such  conduct."  ^ 

^  A  Statement  Respecting  the  Romish  Doctrines  and  Practices  of  the  Rev.  R.  W. 
Randall,  pp.  28,  29.  2  /^/^,  p,  24. 


THE    EPISCOPAL   VETO  38  c; 

The  Rector  never,  so  far  as  I  can  ascertain,  gave  any 
public  denial  to  the  statements  made  by  the  Schoolmaster, 
any  more  than  before  he  had  given  to  those  of  the  Choir- 
master, men,  both  of  them,  of  unblemished  reputation,  and 
who  were  certainly  not  moved  by  any  feelings  of  personal 
ill-will  towards  the  Rector.  Nor  did  the  Rev.  R.  W. 
Randall  deny  that  his  Curate  had  received  the  alleged 
answers  from  the  school  children  as  to  the  Mass  and  Seven 
Sacraments,  nor  that  he  had  adopted  the  ritual  and  cere- 
monies complained  of,  though  he  gave  up  those  portions  of 
his  ritual  to  which  the  Bishop  objected.  He  had,  it  is  true, 
two  Bishops  on  his  side,  viz.,  those  of  Oxford  and  Chi- 
chester. Since  then  the  former  Rector  of  Lavington  has 
developed  his  anti-Protestant  views  greatly,  and  has  be- 
come a  Vice-President  of  the  Romanising  and  rebel  English 
Church  Union,  and  a  leading  man  in  the  Romanising  Con- 
fraternity of  the  Blessed  Sacrament,  estabHshed  for  the 
special  purpose  of  bringing  back  the  self-same  Sacrifice  of 
the  Mass  which  our  Protestant  Martyrs  died  to  put  down. 
And  he  has  obtained  also  great  favour  and  honour  at  the 
hands  of  the  State.  In  1892  he  was  made  Dean  of  Chi- 
chester, an  office  which  he  still  holds. 

The  Bishop  of  Chichester  was  requested  to  issue  a  Com- 
mission, under  the  Church  Discipline  Act,  with  a  view  to  a 
prosecution  of  the  Rev.  R.  W.  Randall  for  teaching  false 
doctrine,  and  for  illegal  practices  ;  but  he  declined  to  do  so. 
Thereupon  the  Rev.  C.  P.  Golightly  applied  to  the  Court  of 
Queen's  Bench  for  a  writ  of  mandanms  commanding  the 
Bishop  of  Chichester  to  issue  a  Commission  under  the  Act. 
The  case  was  heard  on  June  6,  1859,  and  judgment  was  de- 
livered on  June  15th,  refusing  to  grant  the  application. 

Mr.  Justice  Hill  said: — "If  it  were  necessary  to  give  an 
opinion  on  the  construction  of  the  3rd  Section  of  the  Statute 
[Church  Discipline  Act],  I  should  have  thought  that  the  writ  ought 
to  issue,  so  that  a  question  of  such  importance  might  be  decided  on 
the  return  in  such  manner  that  the  judgment  of  this  Court  might  be 
reviewed  by  a  Court  of  Error.  I  am  not  satisfied  that  it  is  a  mere 
matter  in  the  discretion  of  the  Bishop  whether  he  will  issue  a  Com- 
mission if  a  proper  complaint  be  made  by  a  party  who  is  entitled  to 
complain.     But  it  appears  to  me  not  necessary  to  give  any  opinion 

2  B 


386  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

on  the  construction  of  the  Statute.  This  is  an  application  to  the 
discretion  of  the  Court  to  issue  the  prerogative  writ  of  ma?idamus. 
That  the  Court  has  a  discretion  whether  the  writ  shall  be  issued  or 
not  was  distinctly  recognised  by  Ashtirst  J.  in  R.  v.  Bishop  of 
Chester  (i  T.  R.  403),  In  the  case  before  the  Court  the  party 
applying  for  the  writ  of  ?nanda?nus  is  a  total  stranger  to  the  Diocese 
of  Chichester,  and  in  no  way  interested  in  the  matter  charged 
against  Mr.  Randall,  more  than  any  other  Clerk  in  Holy  Orders  in 
the  most  remote  part  of  the  kingdom.  I  think  it  would  be  produc- 
tive of  the  greatest  inconvenience  and  mischief  if  this  Court  were  to 
lend  its  aid  to  any  stranger  to  compel  a  Bishop  to  issue  a  Commis- 
sion in  any  particular  case,  and  that  this  Court  ought  not  to  interfere 
upon  the  application  of  a  party  who  is  not  shown  to  be  a  party 
aggrieved  or  to  have  some  connection  with  the  parish  or  Diocese.  On 
this  short  ground,  therefore,  I  think  the  rule  should  be  discharged." 

Mr.  Justice  Wightm.\n  said  : — "  The  real  question  in  the  case 
is,  whether  the  Bishop  has  any  discretion  in  the  matter,  or  whether, 
under  the  provisions  of  the  Church  Discipline  Act,  3  &  4  Victoria, 
chap.  86,  he  is  absolutely  bound,  without  previous  examination  or 
inquiry  himself,  to  issue  a  Commission  of  Inquiry  as  directed  by  that 
Statute,  if  any  clergyman  of  his  Diocese  is  charged  with  an  offence 
against  the  laws  ecclesiastical.  ...  I  cannot  think  that  such  can 
have  been  the  intention  of  the  Legislature,  but  that  it  was  intended, 
when  this  new  mode  of  procedure  was  instituted,  to  invest  the 
Bishop  with  a  power  to  cause  inquiry  to  be  made  in  cases  where  it 
appeared  to  them  that  the  interests  of  the  Church  and  the  public 
required  it,  and  in  the  belief  that  such  power  would  be  duly  and 
properly  exercised  whenever  a  proper  case  arose ;  and  that  it  was 
better  for  the  interest  of  religion  and  the  public  that  the  Bishop,  who 
is  the  overseer  or  superintendent  of  religious  matters  in  the  Church, 
should  be  intrusted  with  a  discretion  as  to  the  propriety  of  issuing  a 
Commission  of  Inquiry  in  such  cases,  than  that  it  should  be  left 
entirely,  as  expressed  by  Sir  W.  Scott,  to  the  judgment  or  passions 
of  private  persons,  who,  under  the  influence  of  zeal,  or  prejudice, 
or  fancy,  might  call  peremptorily  upon  the  Bishop,  without  any  real 
or  substantial  ground,  upon  a  mere  scandal  or  evil  report,  to  in- 
stitute proceedings  which  would  cause  at  once  expense,  trouble,  and 
vexation,  and  tend  to  create  disturbance  and  scandal  in  the  Church. 
I  am,  therefore,  of  opinion  that  the  Bishop  might  exercise  his  dis- 
cretion as  to  the  propriety  of  issuing  a  Commission  in  this  case, 
and  that  the  present  rule  for  a  mafidaftius  should  be  discharged."  ^ 

Mr.  Justice  Wightman's  opinion,  that  the  Church  Dis- 

^  Guardian,  July  6,  1859,  p.  583. 


THE    EPISCOPAL   VETO  387 

cipline  Act  gave  to  the  Bishop  the  right  to  veto  proceedings 
under  that  Act,  was  upheld  by  the  House  of  Lords  on 
March  23,  1880,  in  the  case  of  Julius  v.  Bishop  of  Oxford. 
The  Episcopal  Veto  has  thus  been  legally  established  ;  but 
there  is  at  present  a  widespread  and  rapidly-growing  feeling 
in  the  country  that  the  Bishops  have  greatly  and  inexcus- 
ably misused  the  Veto,  by  shamelessly  barring  the  Courts 
of  Justice  to  those  who  had  a  right  to  enter,  and  whose  case 
was  a  strong  one.  They  have  used  the  Episcopal  Veto  to 
protect  flagrant  law-breakers  from  the  just  punishment 
which  was  their  due,  and  have  thus  encouraged  the  very 
lawlessness  which  they  ought  to  have  been  the  first  to 
suppress.  It  is  felt  that  it  is  no  longer  safe  to  entrust  them 
with  the  power  of  vetoing  ecclesiastical  prosecutions.  The 
fact  that  they  are  so  costly  and  wearisome  is  alone  sufficient 
to  prevent  any  man,  or  any  body  of  men,  from  taking  up 
the  part  of  prosecutor  without  a  strong  prima  facie  case  in 
hand.  The  Episcopal  Veto  is  at  present  the  shield  of  law- 
lessness, and  the  oppressor  of  justice.  It  must  be  swept 
away,  and  the  sooner  the  better. 

For  many  years  the  Puseyites  had  been  adding  to  their 
stock  of  literature  of  a  Romanising  tendency,  which  had 
become  more  Romish  as  the  years  went  on.  Some  of  the 
works  which  they  produced  were  privately  printed,  and 
were  circulated  with  great  care,  lest  they  should  fall  into 
Protestant  hands.  One  of  the  most  remarkable  books  of 
this  class  was  printed  in  1855,  primarily  for  use  in  the 
Scottish  Episcopal  Church,  but  also  adapted  for  use  in  the 
Church  of  England.  It  was  written  by  the  Rev.  William 
Wright,  LL.D.,  who  died  before  it  was  printed,  and  it  bore 
the  title  of  Directoriuin  Scoticanuvi  et  Anglicanuni.  The 
book  simply  reproduced  the  directions  of  the  Church  of 
Rome  as  to  what  Vestments  Ministers  should  wear  at  Holy 
Communion,  and  what  ornaments  of  the  Church  were 
required  ;  together  with  the  directions  of  the  Papal  Church 
as  to  rites  and  ceremonies.  The  book  was,  in  brief, 
unblushing  Popery.  At  length,  in  1858,  the  Rev.  John 
Purchas,  M.A.,  published  his  now  well-known  Directorium 
Anglicajium,  containing  all  the  superstitions  and  extra va- 


388  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

gances  of  the  Sacrifice  of  the  Mass,  as  found  in  the  Roman 
Church.  At  about  the  same  time  Mr.  Purchas  printed  for 
private  circulation  a  translation  of  the  Cautels  of  the  Mass 
from  the  Sarum  Missal,^  which  were  so  extraordinary  that 
I  gave  a  selection  of  them  in  the  last  chapter  of  my  Secret 
History,  as  they  appeared  in  the  fourth  edition  of  the 
Directormni  Anglicanuni.  These  Cautels  were  secretly  cir- 
culated for  seven  years  before  it  was  considered  safe  to 
give  them  to  the  public.  They  were  published  for  the  first 
time,  in  the  second  edition  of  the  Directorium,  in  1865. 
This  latter  book  created  a  great  sensation  when  it  first  ap- 
peared, was  sold  out  within  six  months,  and  remained  out 
of  print  until  1865.  The  last  edition,  the  fourth,  was 
issued  in  1879,  edited  by  the  Rev.  F.  G.  Lee,  one  of  the 
Bishops  of  the  notorious  and  secret  Order  of  Corporate 
Reunion.  The  work  has  had  a  very  large  circulation 
amongst  the  clergy,  and  this  fact  affords  ample  evidence 
of  the  wide  extent  to  which  Roman  Catholic  ritual  has 
spread  amongst  the  clergy  in  the  pay  of  the  Church  of 
England. 

At  about  this  period  the  subject  of  Theological  Colleges 
occupied  a  great  deal  of  public  attention.  As  far  back  as 
1853,  Mr.  James  Bateman,  F.R.S.,  a  Staffordshire  gentle- 
man, called  attention  to  this  important  subject  at  a  meeting 
held  at  Stoke-on-Trent,  to  consider  the  advisability  of  found- 
ing a  new  Theological  College  at  Lichfield.  He  proved 
clearly  that  Wells  Theological  College  and  Chichester  Dio- 
cesan College  were  already  under  Tractarian  control,  and 
asserted  that  there  was  grave  reason  to  fear  that  the  pro- 
posed College  at  Lichfield  would  turn  out  a  similar  institu- 
tion, a  fear  which  the  subsequent  history  of  that  College 
has  more  than  justified.  "This  Lichfield  scheme,"  said  Mr. 
Bateman,  "  is  but  part  of  an  extensive  scheme  of  Tractarian 
policy,  which  contemplates  the  creation  of  similar  establish- 
ments in  every  Diocese  throughout  the  land,  and  which — 
whenever  the  ecclesiastical  cordon  shall  have  become  com- 
plete— would   effectually   exclude   from   the   walls   of   our 

^  A  Translation  of  the  Catdels  of  the  Sarum  Ritual.     By  John  Purchas,  M.A., 
pp.  14.     4to.     Privately  printed.     1858. 


CUDDESDON    THEOLOGICAL    COLLEGE  389 

Church,  every  Minister  holding  to  the  pure  principles  of  the 
Reformation."  ^ 

As  years  went  on,  the  need  of  Mr.  Bateman's  warning 
became  more  and  more  apparent.  A  Theological  College 
had  been  established  at  Cuddesdon,  near  Oxford,  which  had 
given  cause  for  anxiety  to  the  decided  Protestants  of  the 
Diocese.  They  perhaps  suspected  more  than  they  could 
actually  prove  at  that  time,  but  when,  in  January  1858,  the 
Quarterly  Review  made  an  attack  on  Cuddesdon,  the  Rev. 
C.  P.  Golightly  took  the  subject  up  with  all  the  ardour  for 
which  he  was  famed.  He  issued  a  circular  letter  to  the 
clergy  and  laity  of  the  Diocese  of  Oxford,  calling  attention 
to  the  article  in  the  Quarterly  Review,  summarising  its 
allegations  against  Cuddesdon  College,  and  declaring  that 
the  tendency  of  the  teaching  given  therein  was  "to  sow 
broadcast  the  seeds  of  Romish  perversion  in  the  counties 
of  Oxfordshire,  Berkshire,  and  Buckinghamshire."  ^  The 
Bishop  of  Oxford  (Dr.  S.  Wilberforce),  lost  not  a  day  in 
dealing  with  the  charges,  which  were  as  follows  : — "  i.  That 
the  Chapel  of  the  College  is  '  fitted  up  with  every  fantastic 
decoration  to  which  a  party  meaning  has  been  assigned.' 
2.  That  the  so-called  Altar  *  affects  in  every  particular  the 
closest  approximation  to  the  Romish  model.'  3.  That  the 
service  of  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  is  '  conducted 
with  genuflexions,  rinsings  of  cups  in  the  piscina,  and  other 
ceremonial  acts,  foreign  to  the  ritual  and  usages  of  the 
Church  of  England.'  4.  And,  lastly,  that  a  service-book  is 
in  use  in  the  Chapel  '  concocted  from  the  seven  Canonical 
Hours  of  the  Romish  Church.'"^  The  Bishop  promptly 
called  the  atttention  of  the  Principal  of  the  College  (the 
Rev.  Alfred  Pott),  to  these  accusations,  who  replied,  denying 
the  truth  of  the  charges  altogether,  and  requesting  his  lord- 
ship to  appoint  a  Commission,  consisting  of  the  three  Arch- 
deacons of  the  Diocese,  "  to  examine  into  the  truth  of  Mr. 
Golightly's  allegations,  and  report  officially  to  you  thereon, 
as  the  Visitor  of  the  College."  To  this  request  the  Bishop 
agreed,  and  appointed  the  three  Archdeacons  accordingly, 

^   The  Tractarian  Tendency  of  Diocesan  Theological  Colleges.     By  James  Bate- 
man,  Esq.,  M.A.,  F.R.S.,  p.  27.     London  :  Seeleys.     1853. 

'•*  Guardian,  February  3,  1858,  p.  86.  ^  Ibid. 


390  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

forgetting  that  the  Protestant  party  would  have  had  more 
confidence  in  the  Commission,  if  it  had  been  partly  com- 
posed of  men  who  were  not  the  officials  of  the  Visitor  of 
the  College.  However,  they  made  their  inquiries,  and  after 
they  had  had  an  interview  with  Mr.  Golightly,  they  made 
their  report  in  February.  They  dealt  with  the  charges  in 
the  order  in  which  they  were  made: — (i.,  2.)  "We  see  no 
reason  for  imputing  a  party  meaning  to  any  of  these 
decorations — nevertheless  we  think  it  right  to  express  our 
opinion  that  there  is  too  lavish  a  display  of  ornaments,  and 
we  consider  that  excess  of  decoration  in  the  Chapel  of  such 
an  institution  has  a  tendency,  on  the  one  hand,  to  strengthen 
a  prejudice  which  already  exists  in  some  minds  against 
Theological  Colleges,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  to  encourage 
in  the  students  a  disproportionate  regard  for  the  mere 
accessories  of  public  worship,  and  to  invest  them  with  an 
over-prominent  importance.  The  'so-called  altar'  is  a 
movable  table  of  wood.  It  has  on  the  side  next  the  east 
wall  a  raised  shelf,  on  which  stand  two  candlesticks.  The 
candles  in  these  are  never  lighted,  except  when  the  Chapel 
is  lighted  throughout.  ...  At  the  time  of  the  celebration  of 
Holy  Communion  the  table  is  covered  with  a  fair  linen 
cloth,  without  lace  or  other  ornament.  A  cloth  with  lace 
was  formerly  used  ;  but  the  use  has  been  discontinued  in 
consequence  of  the  recent  judgment  of  the  Privy  Council. 
We  find  that  at  one  period  a  small  metal  cross  stood  on 
the  shelf  of  the  table.  It  v.'as  given  ;  and  was  placed  there 
by  the  donor  without  objection  on  the  part  of  the  heads  of 
the  College  ;  but  was  removed  about  a  year  ago  by  your 
lordship's  directions."  3.  The  truth  of  this  charge  the  Com- 
missioners denied  altogether,  though  they  admit  that  "  it 
was  at  one  time  the  custom  to  rinse  the  Sacramental  vessels 
in  the  piscina  of  the  Chapel  ;  "  but  that  this  practice  had 
"  for  some  time  been  abandoned."  4.  As  to  the  Service- 
Book  in  use  in  the  Chapel — "  We  have  examined  the 
prayers  and  hymns,  and  think  them  not  only  unexception- 
able, but  highly  valuable.  The  book  is  certainly  not  *  con- 
cocted from  the  Seven  Canonical  Hours  of  the  Romish 
Church,'  nor,  in  our  judgment,  does  it  contain  or  suggest 


CUDDESDON  THEOLOGICAL  COLLEGE       391 

any  doctrine  at  variance  with  that  of  the  Church  of  England. 
It  has,  however,  been  cast  in  a  form  which  bears  an  unfor- 
tunate resemblance  to  the  Breviary  of  the  Church  of  Rome  ;  and 
we  think  it  would  be  much  improved  if  the  compilers  would 
abandon  the  title  of  Antiphon,  and  the  obsolete  designation 
of  the  Hours."  ^ 

The  Bishop,  in  sending  on  his  Archdeacons'  report  to  the 
Principal  of  Cuddesdon,  actually  said  : — "  I  am  rejoiced  to 
see  that  it  negatives  completely  every  charge  brought  against 
you  by  my  gossiping  friend,  Mr.  Golightly  ;  "  2  though  how 
that  could  be,  when  it  acknowledged  the  accuracy  of  several 
of  his  facts,  it  is  hard  to  see.  Mr.  Golightly  had  certainly 
proved  to  the  Archdeacons  that  there  was  need  for  reform. 
There  was  more  going  on  in  the  College  than  Mr.  Golightly 
was  then  aware  of.  The  Bishop  himself  was  by  no  means 
satisfied  with  the  existing  state  of  things.  He  wrote  to  a 
friend: — "Then  there  are  things  in  the  actual  life  [in 
Cuddesdon  College]  I  wish  changed.  The  tendency  to 
crowd  the  walls  with  pictures  of  the  Mater  Dolorosa,  &c., 
their  chimney-pieces  with  Crosses,  their  studies  with 
Saints,  all  offend  me  and  all  do  incalculable  injury  to  the 
College  in  the  eyes  of  chance  visitors.  The  habit  of  some 
of  our  men  of  kneeling  in  a  sort  of  rapt  prayer  on  the  steps 
of  the  Communion  Table,  when  they  cannot  be  alone  there  ; 
when  visitors  are  coming  in  and  going  out  and  talking 
around  them  :  such  prayers  should  be  '  in  the  closet '  with 
the  '  door  shut ' — and  setting  apart  their  grave  dangers,  as 
I  apprehend  them  to  be  to  the  young  men,  they  really 
force  on  visitors  the  feeling  of  the  strict  resemblance  to 
what  they  see  in  Belgium,  &c.,  and  never  in  Church  of 
England  Churches."  ^  The  Rev.  H.  P.  Liddon,  afterwards 
widely  known  as  Canon  Liddon,  of  St.  Paul's  Cathedral, 
was  at  this  time  Vice-Principal  of  Cuddesdon  College, 
and  the  Bishop  was  not  satisfied  with  his  teaching  and 
influence — in  fact,  he  was  anxious  to  get  rid  of  him  on 
this  account.  "  It  was,"  says  the  Bishop's  biographer,  "a 
far  graver  and  greater  question  than  one  of  mere  forms 

^   Guardian,  March  3,  1858,  p.  183. 

2  Ibid. 

^  Life  of  Bishop  Wilberforce,  vol.  ii.  p.  368. 


39^  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

and  ceremonies  which  lost  to  Cuddesdon  College  the  ser- 
vices of  its  able  Vice-Principal.  The  Principal,  in  one  of 
his  letters  to  the  Bishop,  says  : — '  On  the  Eucharistic 
question  I  feel  that,  although  I  and  Liddon  have  never 
had  a  word  like  dispute  since  we  have  been  together,  we 
are  mutually  conscious  of  a  difference  on  this  point,  and 
so  are  our  men.'  The  Bishop,  in  a  letter  written  about 
this  time,  says: — 'Our  (that  is,  Liddon's  and  mine),  theo- 
logical standpoint  is  not  identical.  On  the  great  doctrine 
of  the  Eucharist  we  should  use  somewhat  different  lan- 
guage and  our  Ritualistic  tendencies  would  be  all  coloured 
by  this.  On  Confession,  and  its  expedient  limits,  we  should 
also,  I  think,  differ.  The  Principal  entirely  agreed  with 
me. ' "  1 

And  so  Mr.  Liddon  was  induced  to  resign — the  Prin- 
cipal had  already  done  so — but  the  Bishop  was  anxious 
that  the  public  should  not  know  the  real  reason.  So  he 
wrote  to  the  Rev.  W.  J.  Butler,  Vicar  of  Wantage,  and 
afterwards  Dean  of  Lincoln : — "  Now  no  reason  need  be 
given  but  that  after  full  deliberation  the  coming  of  the 
new  Principal  necessitated  a  new  Vice-Principal."  -  The 
biographer  of  Bishop  Wilberforce  denies  that  Golightly's 
attack  was  the  cause  of  Liddon's  resignation  ;  but  a  warm 
friend  of  the  Oxford  Movement,  in  his  sketch  of  Canon 
Liddon's  life,  distinctly  asserts  that  "  on  account  of  the 
attacks  that  were  made  upon  the  College,  after  five  years 
of  laborious  and  loving  work,  Liddon  resigned."  ^  Mr. 
Golightly's  attack  was,  therefore,  not  without  satisfactory 
results.  Another  satisfactory  result  was  seen  at  the  annual 
festival  of  the  College  that  year.  The  Uniotiy  in  giving  a 
friendly  notice  of  the  proceedings,  remarked  that,  "evi- 
dently in  consequence  of  Mr.  Golightly's  attack,"  several 
changes  were  made — "A  Cross  and  flowers  on  the  altar, 
banners,  a  second  celebration,  Gregorian  music,  and  a 
procession  up  the  village  have  been  given  up."*  This 
organ   of   the   advanced   section    of   the    Romanisers    was 

^  Life  of  Bishop  Wilba  force,  vol.  ii.  p.  366. 
"^  Ibid.  p.  371. 

^  Five   Great   Oxford   Leaders.      By   the  Rev.    A.    B.    Donaldson,    p.    237. 
London  :  Rivingtons.     1900. 
•*  Union,  June  5,  1858,  p.  362. 


STATE    OF    THE    DIOCESE    OF    OXFORD  393 

furious  at  Bishop  Wilberforce  and  the  Principal  for  yield- 
ing to  the  Protestant  demands,  and  charged  them  with 
trimming  and  compromising. 

The  Oxford  Protestant  Crusade  against  Tractarianism 
was  renewed  in  January  1859,  but  this  time  it  was  directed 
not  specially  against  Cuddesdon  College,  but  against  the 
Ritualistic  Movement  throughout  the  Diocese  of  Oxford, 
and  included  a  severe  attack  on  the  administration  of  the 
Bishop  of  Oxford  himself.  The  attack  was  again  led  by 
the  Rev.  C.  P.  Golightly,  in  an  anonymous  pamphlet 
(the  authorship  of  which  was  at  once  widely  known),  en- 
titled. Facts  and  Documents  Shewing  the  Alarming  State  of 
the  Diocese  of  Oxford.  The  author  termed  himself  "  neither 
a  High  Churchman  nor  a  Low  Churchman,"  but  "simply 
a  Protestant,  and  a  true  son  of  the  Church  of  England." 
He  quoted  largely  from  the  Directorium  AnglicanuiUy  be- 
cause its  author,  Mr.  Purchas,  acknowledged  his  obligations 
for  assistance  in  compiling  that  Romanising  work  to  the  Rev. 
T.  Chamberlain,  Vicar  of  St.  Thomas',  Oxford  ;  to  the  Rev. 
F.  G.  Lee,  formerly  a  student  of  Cuddesdon  College,  and 
subsequently  a  Curate  in  the  Diocese  of  Oxford  ;  ^  and  to  the 
Rev.  T.  W.  Perry,  then  Curate  of  Addington,  in  the  same 
Diocese.  He  also  quoted  from  the  Churchman' s  Diary, 
of  which  Mr.  Chamberlain  was  the  reputed  editor. 

"I  shall  now,"  continued  Mr.  Golightly,  "proceed  to  set  before 
the  reader  a  series  of  extracts  from  the  above-named  publications, 
and  to  furnish  him  with  a  few  facts,  to  show  the  introduction  into 
the  Diocese,  actual  or  attempted,  of  the  following  peculiarities  of  the 
Romish  system,  viz.,  Auricular  Confession,  Altar  Crosses  and  Cruci- 
fixes, Processions  and  Processional  Crosses  and  Banners,  Stone 
.\ltars,  the  Romish  Wafer,  Mixing  Water  with  the  Wine  at  tlie 
Eucharist,  Elevation  of  the  Elements,  Bowing  to  the  Elements,  the 
Priest  Crossing  Himself,  Unction  of  the  Sick,  Prayers  for  the  Dead, 
Masses  for  the  Dead,  Romish  Vestments,  Romish  Ornaments, 
Sisterhoods.  I  shall  conclude  with  a  few  remarks  upon  Cuddesdon 
College  and  the  Lavington  Case,  with  especial  reference  to  the 
position  of  the  Bishop  of  this  Diocese."  ^ 


^  Since  then  a  Bishop  of  the  secret  Order  of  Corporate  Reunion. 
^  Facts   and  Documents.     By  a  Senior  Clergyman   of  the    Diocese,  p.    11. 
London  :  Wertheim,  Mackintosh  &  Co.     1859. 


394  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

In  proof  of  the  existence  of  Auricular  Confession  in  the 
Diocese,  Mr.  Golightly  quoted  from  the  Churchman' s  Diary, 
and  referred  to  the  Confessional  revelations  which  had  just 
been  made  public  at  Boyne  Hill,  in  the  Diocese,  and  to  the 
Rev.  W.  Gresley's  book,  The  Ordinance  of  Confession,  whose 
author  was  at  the  time  Vicar  of  Boyne  Hill.  As  to  the  use 
of  Crucifixes,  he  merely  relied  on  the  Directoriuin,  without 
mentioning  any  instances  in  which  they  were  in  use  in  the 
Diocese;  but  as  to  Altar  Crosses,  he  said: — "The  Bishop 
of  Oxford  removed  an  Altar  Cross  from  the  shelf  of  the 
Communion  Table  in  Cuddesdon  College  Chapel ;  but  he 
defended  the  use  of  Altar  Crosses,  when  attached  to  the 
east  wall  of  the  Church,  to  the  Churchwardens  of  Holywell 
Parish,  and  in  a  speech  (January  8,  1859)  at  the  consecration 
of  Addington  Church,  near  Winslow.  He  objects,  however, 
to  Crucifixes."  ^  As  to  Processions,  Processional  Crosses, 
and  Banners,  after  citing  the  Directoriuni,  he  added  : — "  A 
Procession  with  Processional  Crosses  took  place  at  the  anni- 
versary of  Cuddesdon  College  in  1855,  and  was  so  strongly 
objected  to  by  some  of  the  clergy,  that  the  Bishop  promised 
that  it  should  not  occur  again."  ^  Yet  on  January  8th, 
that  very  year,  his  lordship  had  taken  part  in  a  procession 
at  the  consecration  of  Addington  Church,  near  Winslow,  in 
which  a  Banner  was  carried,  and  also  a  Processional  Cross, 
by  the  Curate,  the  Rev.  T.  W.  Perry,  one  of  Mr.  Purchas' 
assistants  in  bringing  out  his  Directoriuni.  The  Bishop  had 
consecrated,  in  1848,  three  Cemetery  Chapels  at  Oxford, 
with  illegal  Stone  Altars,  and  he  was  reminded  that  in 
addition  there  were,  at  that  moment.  Stone  Altars  at  St. 
Thomas',  Oxford ;  Wolvercote,  Littlemore,  St.  John's, 
Sandford,  Radley,  and  Binsey,  all  in  his  Diocese.  For 
the  charge  of  using  Wafers  and  the  Mixed  Chalice,  Mr. 
Golightly  quoted  the  Directoriuni,  and  as  to  Elevation  of 
the  Elements,  he  mentioned  that  it  had  been  practised  by 
the  Rev.  F.  G.  Lee,  at  Kennington  Church,  near  Oxford. 
For  the  rest  of  the  charges,  viz..  Bowing  to  the  Elements,  the 
Priest  Crossing  Himself,  Anointing  of  the  Sick,  Prayers  and 

^  Facts  and  Documents,  p.  1 2. 
'■^  Ibid.  p.  13. 


STATE    OF    THE    DIOCESE    OF    OXFORD  395 

Masses  for  the  Dead,  Romish  Vestments  and  Ornaments, 
he  quoted  only  the  Directorhan.  Mr.  Golightly  had  a 
strong  case,  but  it  would  have  been  much  stronger  if  he 
could  have  proved  that  the  Romanising  books  he  had  cited 
were  actually  in  use  in  the  Diocese.  He  concluded  by  giving 
a  list  of  125  Members  of  Oxford  University  who  had  seceded 
to  the  Church  of  Rome,  including  eighty-six  clergymen. 

I  dare  say  that  some  of  my  readers  may  think  these 
were  comparatively  small  things,  when  compared  with  what 
we  see  around  us  to-day  ;  but  I  may  remind  them  of  what 
the  Ritualistic  Church  Review  said  about  them  six  years 
later: — "The  Protestant  is  quite  right  in  recognising  the 
simplest  attempt  at  Ritual  as  the  Mhin  edge  of  the  wedge.' 
It  is  so.  .  .  .  It  is  only  the  child  who  is  not  terrified  when 
the  first  creeping  driblet  of  water  and  the  few  light  bubbles 
announce  the  advance  of  the  tide  ;  and  the  Protestant  is 
but  a  child  who  does  not  recognise  the  danger  of  the 
trifling  symptoms  which  are  slowly  and  surely  contracting 
the  space  of  ground  upon  which  he  stands."  ^  Mr.  Golightly 
recognised  the  danger,  and,  to  his  honour  be  it  recorded, 
he  did  his  best  to  protect  the  Church  by  raising  a  warning 
cry,  though  he  had  to  pay  the  penalty  of  the  scoffs  and 
abuse  of  the  men  whose  unworthy  conduct  he  exposed. 
But,  after  all,  sensible  men  know  very  well  that  ridicule  is 
not  argument. 

No  sooner  was  Mr.  Golightly's  pamphlet  published  than 
a  great  outcry  arose  in  what  may  now  be  termed  the 
Ritualistic  camp,  and  great  wrath  in  the  Palace  of  the 
Bishop  of  Oxford,  whose  special  failing  was  that  he  did  not 
sufficiently  curb  the  extravagances  of  men  who  often  went 
further  than  himself  in  a  wrong  direction.  Dr.  Wilberforce 
always  disliked  the  man,  whether  he  was  a  Protestant  or  a 
Romaniser,  who  was  the  cause  of  a  row.  His  anger  at 
Mr.  Golightly's  audacity  scarcely  knew  any  bounds.  The 
Saturday  Reviezv  was  indecently  insulting.  "  If  anybody," 
it  said,  "is  wanted  to  do  a  job  extremely  dirty  and  offen- 
sive, such  as  signing  a  protest  complaining  of  a  sermon,  or 
denouncing  a  brother  clergyman,  Mr.  Golightly  is  the  man 
for  it." 

1   Chunk  Review,  June  24,  1865,  p.  587. 


396  HISTORY    OF   THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

As  to  the  charge  against  the  Bishop  of  taking  part  in  a 
procession  at  Addington,  in  which  a  Banner  and  Proces- 
sional Cross  were  carried,  the  Rev.  J.  W.  Burgon  (after- 
wards Dean  of  Chichester)  gave  the  following  explanation  : 
— "  Had  the  Reverend  author  of  the  pamphlet,  instead  of 
alarming  himself  and  the  Diocese,  respectfully  asked  his 
lordship  how  it  came  to  pass  that  he  did  not  insist  on  the 
removal  of  such  a  toy  [as  the  Processional  Cross]  before 
proceeding  with  the  consecration,  he  would  doubtless  have 
received  the  same  reply  which  the  present  writer  received 
when  he  asked  the  same  question  : — *  There  was  no 
Bishop's  procession  :  and  I  did  not  see  the  toy  till  it 
was  too  late  to  act ;  or  it  was  just  what  I  would  have 
done.  In  Church  I  actually  did  so,  as  to  the  paraphernalia 
of  the  Celebration.' "  ^  The  Bishop's  own  direct  explanation 
of  what  took  place  was  given  two  months  later,  in  reply  to 
an  address  from  seventy-eight  of  his  Protestant  clergy : — 
"The  only  'Procession'  there,"  said  the  Bishop,  "was  the 
walking  round  the  new  ground  to  be  added  to  the  church- 
yard, as  appointed  in  the  Consecration  Service  in  use  in 
every  Diocese  in  England,  and  the  reading  or  chanting  of 
the  appointed  Psalm.  The  temporary  Curate,  a  stranger  to 
our  Diocese  and  its  usages,  carried  in  his  hand  a  Wand,  to 
which  he  had  fastened  a  small  metal  Cross.  This  he  did  with- 
out my  knowledge,  or  that  of  his  Patron  ;  and,  as  soon  as  I 
had  the  opportunity  of  speaking  to  him,  at  my  desire  he  laid 
it  aside."  ^  And  so  there  was  a  Processional  Cross  after  all  ; 
but  the  Bishop  certainly  cleared  himself  from  any  respon- 
sibility or  blame  for  what  had  taken  place.  Yet  in  the  very 
same  document  in  which  he  completely  cleared  himself,  as 
to  this  instance,  he  actually* defended  the  custom  assailed. 
In  their  Address  to  the  Bishop  the  Protestant  clergy  of  the 
Diocese  had  said  : — "  At  the  Anniversary  of  Cuddesdon 
College,  and  at  the  consecration  or  reopening  of  several 
Churches,  it  is  reported,  and  we  believe  truly,  that  there 
have  been  Processions  of  Clergymen  in  Surplices,  %vith 
Banners  and  Crosses^    and  chanting  Hymns   and   Psalms: 

^  Guardian,  February  23,  1859,  p,  166. 

^  Address  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  of  the  Rev.  E.  A.  Litton  and  Other  Clergy- 
men  of  the  Diocese,  p.  9.     No  printer's  name  or  publisher's. 


STATE    OF    THE    DIOCESE    OF    OXFORD  397 

all  bearing  a  close  resemblance  in  many  respects  to  the 
Romish  Processions."  ^  The  Bishop,  in  his  reply,  quoted 
this  statement  in  full,  did  not  deny  that  Crosses  and 
Banners  were  so  carried ;  defended  what  had  taken  place, 
and  added  : — "/  see  no  objection  to  such  a  devout  and  orderly 
walking  to  Churchy  .  .  .  and  I  therefore  cannot  censure  or 
forbid  it."  ^ 

The  Bishop  acknowledged  that  he  had  consecrated 
Cemetery  Chapels  at  Oxford  with  Stone  Altars,  but  it  was 
without  his  knowledge,  and  that  subsequently  he  had  used 
his  influence  and  succeeded  in  having  placed  in  their  room 
movable  tables  with  wooden  legs,  but  with  **  stone  tops." 
When  such  stone  slabs  had  been  erected  elsewhere  in  the 
Diocese,  he  did  not  "  think  it  wise  to  move  in  the  matter," 
in  order  to  their  removal,  so  long  as  no  "superstitious 
use"  was  made  of  them;  indeed,  he  "saw  no  objection 
to  their  retention."  ^  Dr.  Wilberforce  acknowledged  that 
Churchmen  in  the  Diocese  did  "  suffer  much  from  the 
attempts  made  dy  a  few,  mostly  inexperienced  young  men,^ 
to  introduce  amongst  us  unusual  ornaments  or  Ritual 
observances" — so  that  the  Bishop  had  to  acknowledge 
after  all  that  there  was  just  cause  for  anxiety.  In  con- 
cluding his  reply  to  the  Protestant  clergy  of  his  Diocese, 
his  lordship  censured  them  for  what  they  had  done,  declared 
that  the  controversy  had  been  "  wantonly  stirred  up,"  and 
added  the  request  : — "  If  at  any  time  any  point  in  my 
conduct  of  the  Diocese  causes  you  scruple  or  alarm,  that 
you  will  tell  me  privately  of  your  difticulty,  instead  of 
flying  to  inflammatory  appeals."  ^  But,  unfortunately  for 
his  plea,  Mr.  Golightly  had  told  the  Bishop  "privately," 
some  time  before  he  appealed  to  the  public,  what  had 
"  caused  him  scruple  and  alarm  "  in  the  Bishop's  conduct 
at  Cuddesdon  and  throughout  the  Diocese,  and  had  got 
nothing  from  him  for  his  pains.     In  matters  of  this  kind 

^  Address  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  p.  I. 
«  Ibid.  pp.  8,  9. 
^  Ibid.  pp.  12,  13. 

*  This  is  exactly  what  the  Bishops  now  say  of  the  Romanisers;  they  are  but 
"few,"  and  "inexperienced  young  men."  But  where  they  are  now  the  rank  and 
file  will  be  thirty  years  hence,  if  not  checked. 

*  Address  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  pp.  15,  16. 


398  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

public  appeals  are  alone  likely  to  make  the  Bishops  do  their 
duty.  If  High  Church  Bishops  can  only  succeed  in  gag- 
ging the  Protestants,  so  as  to  stifle  their  public  protests 
against  Popery  in  the  Church  of  England,  the  cause  of 
the  Reformation  will  not  long  survive  in  her  fold. 

To  the  Bishop's  reply  a  weighty  rejoinder  was  pub- 
lished by  the  Rev.  J.  Tucker,  B.D.,  Vicar  of  West  Hen- 
dred,  Berks,  and  formerly  Fellow  of  Corpus  Christi 
College,  Oxford.  Mr.  Tucker  was  one  of  the  oldest 
clergymen  in  the  Diocese,  and  his  reply  was  able,  learned, 
and  convincing.  At  the  close  he  addressed  the  Bishop 
in  words  of  great  power  and  justice  : — 

"And  now,  my  lord,"  he  said,  "in  conclusion,  I  must  make  my 
very  serious  appeal  to  your  lordship,  in  the  hope  that  it  may  not  be 
in  vain.  I  am  not  writing  in  the  heat,  and  under  the  imjjulse  of 
youth,  for  I  am  advancing  in  years;  nor  am  I  conscious  of  any 
feeling  of  bitterness  towards  yourself  or  any  individual ;  I  have  well 
thought  over  and  calmly  deliberated,  not  only  upon  what  I  have 
now  written,  but  on  every  step  that  I  have  taken  in  conjunction 
with  those  with  whom  I  am  associated.  It  is  my  conviction, 
resting,  as  I  believe,  on  plain  matters  of  fact,  that  views  are  being 
propagated  and  are  spreading  throughout  our  Church,  subversive  of 
that  pure  faith  restored  by  our  forefathers,  and  tending  to  gradually 
bring  us  back  into  all  the  corruptions  and  superstitions  of  Rome ; 
and  under  this  conviction,  I  consider  myself  bound  by  the  most 
solemn  obligations  to  do  what  I  can  in  my  day,  in  my  humble  and 
narrow  sphere,  to  expose  and  resist  these  encroachments,  and  to 
uphold  God's  pure  truth. 

"  I  have  consequently  heartily  and  readily  joined  with  otners  of 
my  brethren  in  the  Ministry  in  remonstrating  with  the  Archdeacons 
and  Rural  Deans  on  their  statements  and  assertions,  and  in  address- 
ing your  lordship  on  the  state  of  things.  While  others,  the  majority 
of  the  clergy  in  the  Diocese,  have  also  addressed  your  lordship,  they 
have  spoken  only  of  their  confidence  and  attachment  to  your  person, 
and  admiration  of  your  great  activity  and  zeal,  and  have  made  general 
and  vague  declarations  of  their  disbelief  of  any  danger  :  but  they  have 
tiot  brought  forivard  otie  single  fact,  nor  questioned  one  single  assertiofi 
of  facts  made  by  us.  We,  on  our  part  iiave,  in  both  the  Remo7istrance 
and  Address,  dealt  ■^\i\\  facts,  and  facts  alone;  and,  whilst  we  have 
most  carefully  avoided  everything  that  could  be  construed  into  dis- 
respect to  your  lordship,  or  that  could  cause  unnecessary  irritation 


STATE    OF    THE    DIOCESE    OF    OXFORD  399 

in  the  breast  of  any  one,  we  have  asked  your  lordship  to  discourage 
and  suppress,  so  far  as  you  can,  certain  things  which  we  specify  as 
leading  to  Popery. 

"  Your  lordship  in  your  reply  has  refused  every  one  of  our  re- 
quests ;  you  have  coficeded  nothing ;  one  thing  you  admit  the  existence 
of,  and  you  admit  that  it  is  unlawful ;  but,  instead  of  promising  to 
exercise  your  own  influence  and  authority  as  a  Ruler  in  the  Church 
for  its  removal,  you  say  to  us,  'you  have  the  same  power  of  remov- 
ing them  as  I  have.'  Thus  you  give  your  countenance  to  those  who 
promote  what  our  Reformers  condemned,  and  discountenance  those 
who  seek  for  nothing  but  what  our  Protestant  fathers  upheld.  As 
regards  human  judgment,  let  the  Church,  her  Bishops,  Clergy,  and 
Laity,  judge  between  your  lordship  and  us.  Vital  truth  is  at  stake ; 
and  it  concerns  not  this  Diocese  only,  nor  the  Clergy  alone,  but  the 
whole  Church  of  England,  Clergy,  and  Laity,  at  home  and  abroad, 
to  see  that  the  Truth  is  preserved.  .  .  . 

*'  I  respectfully  entreat  your  lordship  to  abstain  in  future  from 
casting  reflections  on  any  body  of  your  Clergy,  however  small,  who 
under  a  sense  of  duty  express  to  your  lordship  their  honest  and 
deliberate  convictions.  It  cannot  tend  to  uphold  either  your  own 
character  or  ours,  nor  to  promote  peace.  While  respect  is  justly  due 
from  Presbyters  to  their  Bishop,  they  have  a  right  to  look  to  be 
treated  with  respect  by  him."^ 

The  address  of  the  three  Archdeacons  and  twenty-four 
Rural  Deans  to  which  Mr.  Tucker  here  refers,  was  dated 
February  23rd.  It  asserted  that  the  statements  contained 
in  Facts  and  Documents  were,  from  their  "  own  knowledge 
of  the  Diocese,"  nothing  less  than  "  unjustifiable  misrepre- 
sentations." They  denied  that  the  Bishop  had  "  ever 
sanctioned  any  peculiarities  of  the  Romish  system."  They 
condemned  Mr.  Purchas'  Directoi'iuvi  Anglicanuni  as  "a 
very  unwise  and  mischievous  publication  "  ;  but  they  took 
good  care  not  to  term  it,  as  it  deserved,  a  disloyal  and 
thoroughly  Popish  production.  They  declared  themselves 
to  be  **  loyal  and  affectionate  sons"  of  the  Church  of 
England,  opposed  to  the  introduction  of  any  peculiarities 
of  the  Romish  system  ;  and,  in  conclusion,  they  solemnly 
affirmed  that  the  statements  of  Mr.  Golightly  were  "pre- 
sumptuous and  unfounded  calumnies  against  your  lordship 

1  A  Letter  to  the  Lord  Bishop  of  Oxford.     By  the  Rev.  J.  Tucker,  B.D.,  2nd 
edition,  pp.  15-17.     London  :  James  Nisbet  &  Co.      1859. 


400  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

in  the  Diocese."  ^  But,  as  Mr.  Tucker  so  forcibly  pointed 
out,  they  had  "  not  brought  forward  one  single  fact,  nor 
questioned  one  single  assertion  of  facts  "  brought  forward 
on  the  Protestant  side.  It  was  all  assertion,  and  no  proof ! 
But  it  pleased  the  Bishop  immensely.  His  reply  was  all 
gushing  gratitude,  though  he  could  scarcely  have  forgotten 
that  the  testimony  in  his  favour  was  entirely  from  men 
who  held  their  offices  as  Archdeacons  and  Rural  Deans 
solely  and  entirely  to  his  nomination,  and  at  his  pleasure. 
He  thanked  God  that  his  Diocese  was  not  "  the  centre  of 
a  Romanising  Movement,"  though  it  was  manifest  to  the 
world  that  the  Movement  was  born  in  Oxford,  and  still 
drew  its  main  inspiration  from  its  University. 

In  reply  to  the  Address  of  the  Archdeacons  and  Rural 
Deans,  a  Remonstrance  was  signed  by  eighty-four  Pro- 
testant clergymen  of  the  Diocese.  In  this  document  they 
appealed  to  a  series  of  facts,  which  they  enumerated,  of  a 
distinctly  Romanising  character,  and  challenged  those 
whom  they  addressed  to  deny,  if  they  could,  their  accuracy  ; 
and  "  to  specify,  one  by  one,  what  are  the  statements  which 
they  feel  bound  solemnly  to  declare  are  '  unjustifiable 
misrepresentations,'  and  *  presumptuous  and  unfounded 
calumnies  ' "  ^  in  the  pamphlet.  Facts  and  Documents,  My 
readers  will,  no  doubt,  be  very  much  surprised  to  hear  that 
the  Archdeacons  and  Rural  Deans  never  accepted  this  chal- 
lenge, and  that  they  had  not  the  courtesy  even  to  formally 
acknowledge  its  receipt.  But  one  of  the  Rural  Deans,  to 
whom  the  Protestant  Remonstrance  was  addressed,  the 
Rev.  Henry  Bull,  published  a  reply  on  his  own  account, 
and  not  as  the  delegated  representative  of  the  others. 
Mr.  Bull  declared  that  their  Address  to  the  Bishop  was 
mainly  intended  as  a  vote  of  confidence  in  him  personally. 
"But  the  Remonstrants,"  wrote  Mr.  Bull,  "on  the  other 
hand,  maintain  that  there  was  no  misrepresentation  ;  and 
in  order  to  establish  their  case,  challenge  us  to  disprove 
certain  facts  stated  by  the  Senior  Clergyman.  We  do  not 
deny,  we  never  thought  of  denying  them;    but  we  say  the 

1  An  Impartial  Accotint  of  the  Receftt  Agitation  in  the  Diocese  of  Oxford,  pp. 
5,  6.     London  :  Edward  Thompson.     1859. 

2  Ibid.  p.  12. 


STATE    OF   THE    DIOCESE    OF    OXFORD  40 1 

inference  drawn  from  these  facts  is  unjust  ;  and  I  must 
remark  that  even  facts^  when  pleaded  to  a  wrong  issue, 
are  virtual  misrepresentations}  So  that,  after  all,  Mr. 
Golightly  had  but  told  the  truth,  so  far  as  facts  were 
concerned.  And  the  facts  certainly  justified  the  Protes- 
tant agitation  which  arose  when  they  became  known  to 
the  public. 

Mr.  Bull's  pamphlet  was  replied  to  by  the  Rev.  W.  H. 
Freemantle,  Rector  of  Claydon,  and  himself  a  Rural  Dean 
in  the  Diocese.  He  was  subsequently  greatly  revered  and 
loved  as  Dean  of  Ripon.  He  claimed  that  those  who  signed 
the  Remonstrance  had  no  lack  of  personal  affection  and 
respect  for  their  Bishop,  but,  he  added  : — 

"  Public  observation  has  been  aroused.  i\Ir.  Gresley's  book  upon 
the  Confessional — his  appointment,  and  Mr.  West's  to  Boyne  Hill — 
Mr.  Ridley's  Tract  upon  the  Eucharist,  at  Reading — Cuddesdon 
College — Holywell  stone  altar,  and  the  painted  chancel — the  pro- 
ceedings at  the  reopening  of  Cuddington,  Finmere,  North  Moreton, 
and  Addington  Churches — the  stone  tables  at  Wantage,  and  the 
Oxford  Cemeteries — the  Sisters  of  Mercy — these  and  other  subjects 
which  have  from  time  to  time  been  discussed  in  the  newspapers, 
have  turned  every  eye  upon  our  poor  Diocese.  .  .  . 

"  Why  am  I  to  be  dubbed  a  Low  Churchman,  because  I  have 
the  Ten  Commandments  and  the  Lord's  Prayer  over  my  wooden 
Communion  Table ;  and  my  neighbour  styled  a  good  Churchman, 
because  he  has  three  steps  up  to  his  altar,  with  its  super-altar, 
candlesticks,  and  stone  cross  in  relief  upon  the  east  wall  ?  I  depre- 
cate this  distinction — because  I  claim  to  have  the  law  on  my  side, 
and  I  think  my  neighbour  has  exceeded  it.  Let  us  be  true  to  one 
another.  If  we  old-fashioned  Churchmen,  with  our  wooden  tables 
and  whitewashed  walls  and  unadorned  chancels,  are  robbers  of 
churches  and  blasphemers  of  holy  things,  the  law  is  open,  and 
any  one  may  implead  us.  But  if  we  are  found  to  be  quite  as  earnest 
and  zealous  as  others  in  maintaining  the  decency  and  spirituality  of 
public  worship,  and  quite  as  successful  in  securing  the  attendance 
of  the  people,  and  in  attaching  them  to  the  Church  of  our  fathers, 
and  in  converting  sinners  to  Christ,  then  let  us  not  be  ridiculed,  or 


^  Some  Remarks  upon  the  Remonstrance  Addressed  to  the  Archdeacons  and 
Rural  Deans.  A  Letter  to  the  Rev.  W.  R.  Freemantle.  By  the  Rev.  Henry 
Bull,  Rural  Dean,  p.  5.     Oxford  :  Parker.     1859. 

2   C 


402  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Stamped   with   opprobrious   names,   or   branded    as    Puritans    and 
Dissenters."^ 

The  next  event  in  the  agitation  which  arose  out  of  Mr. 
Golightly's  pamphlet,  was  an  address  of  confidence  in  the 
Bishop,  signed  by  the  large  number  of  495  clergymen  in  the 
Diocese.  If  truth  and  justice  always  go  with  the  largest 
number,  then,  undoubtedly,  on  this  occasion,  the  Pro- 
testants were  in  the  wrong,  and  those  they  attacked  were  in 
the  right.  But  it  is  not  always  so.  This  Address  was  very 
brief,  but  because  of  its  importance  1  give  it  here  in  full  : — 

"We,  the  undersigned  Clergy  of  the  Diocese  of  Oxford,  beg 
permission,  under  the  present  circumstances  of  the  Diocese,  to 
approach  your  lordship  with  expressions  of  sincere  respect  and 
affection. 

"We  have  been  much  surprised  and  distressed  at  the  wide 
distribution  around  us  of  a  pamphlet  entitled  Facts  and  JDocuments 
Showing  the  Alartning  State  of  the  Diocese  of  Oxford^  by  '  A  Senior 
Clergyman  of  the  Diocese ' ;  which,  although  in  itself  wholly  un- 
worthy the  attention  of  any  reasoning  mind,  is  yet  calculated  to 
encourage  the  heart-burnings  of  those  who  are  ignorant  and  under 
the  power  of  their  prejudices. 

"  We  conceive  ourselves  to  be,  from  our  position,  the  best  able 
to  judge  of  the  truth  or  falsehood  of  the  affirmations  made  in  the 
pamphlet  to  which  we  refer,  and  we  utterly  deny  that  either  in  public 
or  in  those  private  communications  which  in  all  courtesy  and  kind- 
ness you  are  at  all  times  ready  to  encourage  in  your  Clergy,  you 
have  ever  given  countenance  to  practices  which  might  tend  to 
Popery,  and  we  affirm  that  it  has  constantly  been  your  aim  to 
encourage  true  Protestantism,  and  the  religion  of  the  Bible,  as  set 
forth  and  explained  in  the  formularies  of  our  Church. 

"  We  desire  to  express  to  your  lordship  our  hearty  concurrence 
in  the  Address  presented  to  you,  with  the  signature  of  our  Archdeacons 
and  Rural  Deans. 

"  And  we  thank  your  lordship  for  your  able  and  most  satisfactory 
answer  given  to  that  Address."  ^ 

In  order  to  understand  the  real  value  of  this  Address,  it 
is  necessary  to  study  the  following  note,  which  was  attached 

^  Reasons  for  Sighting  the  Remonstrance.  By  the  Rev.  W.  R.  Freemantle, 
M.A.J  Rector  of  Claydon,  and  Rural  Dean,  pp.  14-16.     London  :  Nisbet  &  Co. 

"  An  Impartial  Aicoiint,  p.  14. 


STATE    OF    THE    DIOCESE    OF    OXFORD  403 

to  it,  explaining  that  portion  of  the  third  paragraph  which 
follows  "  we  affirm  that "  : — "  The  Clergy  whose  signatures 
are  marked  with  an  asterisk  consider  the  latter  part  of  the 
third  clause  to  be  indistinct,  and  would  prefer  that  it  should 
stand  thus  —  'Your  lordship's  aim  has  always  been  to 
encourage  a  sincere  attachment  to  the  distinctive  teaching 
of  the  Reformed  Church  of  England,  as  proved  by  Holy 
Scripture,  and  embodied  in  her  authorised  formularies.' "  ^ 
The  passage  which  these  clergymen  would  "  prefer "  to 
leave  out  was  as  follows  : — "  It  has  constantly  been  your 
aim  to  encourage  true  Protestantism ^  and  the  religion  of  the 
Bible,  as  set  forth  and  explained  in  the  formularies  of  our 
Church."  That  is,  they  would  "prefer"  to  leave  out 
"  Protestantism,"  and  place  the  Church  before  the  Bible, 
in  order  of  precedence.  No  fewer  than  212,  out  of  the  495 
who  signed  the  Address,  had  attached  to  their  names  the 
asterisk  which  indicated  their  preference  for  the  alteration. 
This  fact  alone  is  a  clear  and  unmistakable  proof  of  the 
extent  to  which  anti-Protestantism  had  spread  in  the 
Diocese  of  Oxford,  and  more  than  justified  Mr.  Golightly 
in  placing  on  the  title-page  of  his  pamphlet  the  words 
"  Alarming  State  of  the  Diocese  of  Oxford."  I  have,  further, 
looked  through  the  list  of  names  of  those  who  signed  this 
Address,  and  find  in  it  a  large  number  of  those  who  subse- 
quently were  well  known  as  amongst  the  most  advanced 
Romanisers  in  the  Church  of  England. 

Later  on  in  the  year  an  Address  from  about  4000  laity  of 
the  Diocese  of  Oxford,  including  3  Members  of  Parliament, 
23  Magistrates,  and  179  Churchwardens,  was  presented  to 
the  Bishop,  in  which  it  was  stated  : — "  We  assure  your 
lordship  that  there  exists  in  the  minds  of  the  best  friends 
of  our  Church  a  growing  mistrust,  in  consequence  of  the 
Romanising  tendency  of  many  of  the  innovations  intro- 
duced by  certain  of  the  clergy  into  the  practices  and  Ritual 
of  its  services  ; "  and  expressing  a  hope  that  the  Bishop 
would  exercise  the  powers  he  possessed  "to  arrest  the 
progress  of  these  objectionable  innovations,  to  allay  the 
fears  which  we  entertain,  and  to  suppress  all  such  causes 
for  further  apprehension." 

■•  An  Impartial  Account,  p.  14  note. 


404  HISTORY    OF   THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

Since  1859  Church  affairs,  from  a  Protestant  point  of 
view,  have  gone  from  bad  to  worse  in  the  Diocese  of 
Oxford.  Some  slight  attempts  were  made  to  reform 
Cuddesdon  College  for  a  time,  but  they  were  soon 
dropped ;  and  now  the  state  of  things  therein  is  in  so 
unsatisfactory  a  condition  that  it  may  be  safely  asserted 
that  there  is  no  Institution  in  the  country  which  has  turned 
out  such  a  large  proportion  of  Romanising  and  law-break- 
ing clergy  as  Cuddesdon  College,  which,  by  its  statutes, 
is  placed  under  the  sole  control  of  the  Bishop  of  Oxford 
for  the  time  being,  and  who  must  therefore  be  held 
primarily  responsible  for  what  takes  place  within  its 
walls. 


CHAPTER  XIV 

The  St.  George's  in  the  East  Riots— The  Rev.  Bryan  King— The  Rev. 
Hugh  Allen — The  attitude  of  the  Bishop  of  London — The  Rector 
resigns — Church  of  England  Protection  Society — Formation  of  the 
English  Church  Union — Its  early  delight  in  Ecclesiastical  Prosecu- 
tions— Opposes  Prayer  Book  Revision  "at  present" — Dr.  Littledale 
advocates  "Catholic  Revision" — He  is  "bowed  down"  with  grief, 
shame,  and  indignation — Expulsion  of  Protestant  clergymen  aimed 
at — Preaching  in  Theatres  "a  profane  and  degrading  practice" — 
The  Union  attempts  to  prosecute  Evangelical  clergymen — The 
Union  praises  the  Bishop  of  Salisbury  for  prosecuting  Dr.  Williams 
— The  Union  demands  the  prosecution  and  deprivation  of  the  Evan- 
gelical Bishop  Waldegrave — The  E.C.U.  demands  a  cheap  and  easy 
way  to  prosecute  Archbishops,  Bishops,  and  clergy — Tries  to  prose- 
cute foreign  Protestant  Pastors  —  The  Church  Review  says  the 
Union  was  established  to  "enforce  the  law" — It  declares  that  "to 
silence  the  teacher  of  heresy  is  the  plain  duty  of  the  Church's 
Governors" — Dr.  Pusey  prosecutes  Professor  Jowett — Pusey  says 
that  "prosecution  is  not  persecution" — The  Church  Review  praises 
prosecutors  as  men  of  "  moral  courage " — The  President  of  the 
E.C.U.  promises  obedience  to  the  Courts  of  Judicature. 

In  the  year  1859  the  Parish  Church  of  St.  George's  in  the 
East,  London,  was  the  scene  of  prolonged  rioting.  Its 
Rector,  the  Rev.  Bryan  King,  had  been  appointed  to  the 
living  in  1842.  He  was  an  enthusiastic  supporter  of  the 
Oxford  Movement,  and  was  well  known  as  a  very  obstinate 
and  self-willed  man,  as  even  his  warmest  friends  admit. 
He  lacked  tact  and  a  conciliatory  spirit,  and  consequently 
did  not  rally  many  friends  around  him  in  his  new  parish, 
of  no  fewer  than  45,000  souls,  mostly  of  the  very  poor,  and 
largely  of  the  criminal  class.  Mr.  King  soon  made  altera- 
tions in  the  Church  services,  in  a  High  Church  direction, 
which  were  very  distasteful  to  the  majority  of  those  who 
attended  church.  At  length  he  even  went  so  far  as  to 
introduce  the  use  of  the  Romish  Vestments  at  Holy  Com- 
munion.    He  attached  great  importance  to  Ritual,  as  we 


40 6  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

learn  from  a  pamphlet  which  he  published  in  i860.  Re- 
ferring therein  to  his  introduction  of  these  Vestments  in 
1857,  he  remarked : — "  I  cannot  indeed  see  any  reason 
why  I  was  to  be  blamed  for  acting  in  this  instance  as  I 
did.  These  Eucharistic  Vestments  of  the  Church  are  being 
used  in  from  fifty  to  sixty  Churches  in  England,  and  their 
adoption  is  being  extended  in  other  Churches,  I  believe, 
almost  every  month.  I  am  sure  that  we  shall  never 
succeed  in  teaching  our  flocks,  and  especially  the  poorer 
members  of  them,  the  deep  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Eucha- 
rist, and  the  place  which  that  Sacrament  holds  in  the 
economy  of  Christian  grace  as  the  one  act  of  Worship 
and  Sacrifice  offered  by  the  Church  to  Almighty  God, 
without  the  aid  of  such  external  adjuncts  of  Ritual."  ^ 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  Mr.  King  found  that  the  Ritual  he 
adopted  did  not  attract  the  poorer  members  of  his  parish 
to  his  Church  at  all.  The  attendance  grew  less  and  less, 
while  opposition  continued  to  increase.  At  the  same  time 
Mr.  King's  remarks  may  serve  to  show  us  how  the  modern 
Ritualists  teach  their  doctrine  to  the  eye  by  Ritual,  as  well 
as  to  the  ear,  from  the  pulpit.  In  fighting  the  Ritual,  there- 
fore, we  are  fighting  the  doctrine  which  it  is  intended  to 
symbolise  and  teach. 

In  the  month  of  December  1858  the  office  of  Lecturer 
in  the  Parish  Church  of  St.  George's  in  the  East  fell  vacant. 
The  appointment  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Vestry  of  the 
parish,  who  elected  the  Rev.  Hugh  Allen  to  the  post. 
Now  Mr.  Allen  was  an  out-and-out  Protestant,  and  there- 
fore a  stern  foe  to  the  Ritualism  of  Mr.  Bryan  King.  In 
alarm  that  gentleman  appealed  to  the  Bishop  of  London 
(Dr.  Tait)  to  refuse  to  Mr.  Allen  that  licence  without  which 
he  could  not  officiate  as  Lecturer  ;  but  the  appeal  was  in 
vain.  Mr.  Allen  was  licensed  on  May  17,  1859.  On  the 
following  Sunday  afternoon,  the  Rector  being  absent  from 
home,  Mr.  Allen  entered  the  Church  at  3.40  P.M.,  and 
insisted  on  saying  the  Litany  and  lecturing,  instead  of 
the  usual  service  at  4  P.M.,  conducted  by  the  Rector  or 
one  of  his  Curates.     To  this  course  the   Rector  at  once 

^  Sacrilege  and  Its  Encoumgemmi.     By  Bryan    King,   M.A.,  Rector  of  St. 
George's  in  the  East   2nd  edition,  p.  12.     London  :  Masters.     1S60. 


RIOTS    AT    ST.    GEORGE'S    IN    THE    EAST  407 

raised  an  objection,  and  the  difficulty  was  settled,  after 
an  appeal  to  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench,  by  an  arrange- 
ment by  which  Mr.  Allen  was  allowed  to  hold  his  service 
at  2.15  P.M.  each  Sunday,  to  be  followed  by  the  Rector's 
service  at  4  P.M.,  the  arrangement  to  take  effect  from 
Sunday,  June  29th.  On  Sunday,  June  5th,  unseemly  dis- 
turbances took  place  in  the  Parish  Church  at  both  the 
afternoon  and  evening  services  ;  but  on  and  after  June 
29th  peace  was  restored  for  a  while.  Rioting,  however, 
broke  out  again  on  August  14th,  and  was  continued, 
Sunday  after  Sunday,  with  occasional  intervals,  until  the 
following  March,  when  by  order  of  the  Bishop  all  the 
Ritualistic  ornaments  of  the  Church,  which  had  been  the 
primary  cause  of  the  disturbances,  were  swept  away  while 
the  Rector  was  abroad  on  a  twelve  months'  holiday.  Soon 
after  an  arrangement  was  made  by  which  Mr.  Bryan  King 
exchanged  livings  with  a  country  clergyman,  and  then  the 
St.  George's  in  the  East  Riots  came  to  an  end. 

In  one  sense  the  Protestant  opposition  had  succeeded, 
but  in  reality  it  had  been  a  disastrous  failure.  The  conduct 
of  the  mobs  in  Church  had  been  disgraceful  in  the  extreme. 
Hassocks  were  thrown  about,  irreverent  whistling,  joking, 
and  singing  were  heard,  stamping  of  feet,  assaults  were  made 
on  the  clergy,  and  orange-peel  and  bread  and  butter  were 
thrown  at  the  Communion  Table.  The  mob  was  largely 
composed  of  some  of  the  lowest  ruffians  of  that  low  neigh- 
bourhood, and  these,  caring  for  neither  Protestantism  nor 
Puseyism,  nor  anything  else,  used  the  occasion  for  their 
own  purposes.  The  result  of  all  this  was  that  a  great  spirit 
of  sympathy  for  the  attacked  party  arose,  not  merely  in 
East  London,  but  throughout  the  length  and  breadth  of 
the  land,  and  the  conduct  of  the  rioters  was  sternly  con- 
demned by  the  respectable  Protestants.  In  the  height  of 
the  disturbances  the  Bishop  of  London,  who  certainly  had 
no  sympathy  with  Ritualism,  and  sternly  disapproved  of 
the  Rector's  conduct,  wrote  to  the  senior  Churchwarden  : 
— "No  language  can  be  too  strong  to  express  the  abhor- 
rence with  which  all  persons  of  any  true  Christian  feeling 
must  regard  such  outrages,  if  they  really  take  place,  as  is 


408  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

not  denied.  It  is  the  grossest  self-deceit  to  suppose  that 
they  can  be  justified  by  any  provocation  which  the  Rector's 
choral  service  or  usual  habiliments  may  have  given."  ^  But, 
on  the  other  hand,  in  the  House  of  Lords,  the  Bishop  said  : 
— "  If  the  Rector  of  that  parish  would  do  what  he  ought 
to  have  done  months  ago,  and  say,  '  I  am  unable  to  manage 
this  parish,  I  beg  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese  to  manage  it 
for  me,'  all  the  mischief  might  be  put  an  end  to."^ 

An  important  event  in  the  history  of  the  Romeward 
Movement  took  place  on  May  12,  1859,  when  the  "  Church 
of  England  Protection  Society "  was  formed,  which  in  the 
following  year  adopted  the  now  well-known  title  of  "The  Eng- 
lish Church  Union."  Amongst  the  more  noteworthy  mem- 
bers of  the  Union  whose  names  appear  in  its  first  Annual 
Report  are.  Lord  Richard  Cavendish,  Sir  Stephen  R.  Glynne 
(of  Hawarden  Castle),  Archdeacon  Denison,  and  the  Revs. 
W.  J.  E.  Bennett,  R.  Rhodes  Bristow  (now  known  as  Canon 
Rhodes  Bristow),  T.  T.  Carter  (of  Clewer),  J.  C.  Chambers 
(editor  of  the  Priest  in  Absolution),  John  Keble,  Bryan  King, 
Hon.  and  Rev.  Robert  Liddell,  F.  G.  Lee  (now  known  as 
Bishop  of  the  O.C.R.),  T.  W.  Mossman  (afterwards  Bishop 
of  the  O.C.R.),  J.  M.  Neale,  T.  W.  Perry,  Alfred  Poole, 
R.  W.  Randall  (now  Dean  of  Chichester),  J.  R.  Woodford 
(afterwards  Bishop  of  Ely),  and  the  Hon".  Colin  Lindsay, 
first  President  of  the  Union,  who  afterwards  became  a 
Roman  Catholic.  In  the  first  year  of  its  existence,  the 
Church  of  England  Protection  Society  issued  a  Tract  on 
Remedies  at  Law  Against  Disturbers  of  Divine  Service,  with 
a  view,  no  doubt,  to  the  St.  George's  in  the  East  Riots, 
which  were  proceeding  at  the  time,  and  on  November  24th 
it  sent  a  deputation  to  the  Bishop  of  London,  to  ask  him  to 
use  his  influence  with  the  Churchwardens,  to  compel  them 
to  put  down  the  disturbances.  The  Bishop  received  them 
with  great  courtesy,  told  them  that  the  Churchwardens 
were,  he  believed,  anxious  to  do  their  duty  in  this  respect, 
and  then — says  the  report  of  the  proceedings  in  the  Union — 
"  proceeded  to  urge  upon  the  deputation  the  duty  of  the 
Church  of   England  Protection  Society  endeavouring   to 

^  Life  of  Archbishop  Tait,  vol.  i.  p.  238.  ^  Ibid.  p.  246. 


PRAYER    BOOK    REVISION  409 

persuade  the  Rector  to  meet  the  feelings  of  the  people,  and  to 
abate  some  of  the  practices  objected  to  as  the  most  likely  way 
of  queUing  the  disorders."  ^  The  members  of  the  deputation 
do  not  appear  to  have  promised  to  use  their  influence  in 
this  salutary  manner ;  they  would,  no  doubt,  have  preferred 
to  encourage  the  Rector  in  his  Romanising  practices.  That 
is  what  the  Society  actually  did,  for  we  are  told,  in  its  first 
annual  report,  that  after  the  interview  with  the  Bishop,  "  it 
offered  to  assist  Mr,  Bryan  King  with  such  means  as  it  pos- 
sessed of  obtaining  for  his  guidance  the  best  legal  advice."  ^ 
In  view  of  an  expected  motion  in  the  House  of  Lords 
by  Lord  Ebury  in  favour  of  Prayer  Book  Revision  on  Pro- 
testant Hues,  the  Society  circulated  for  signature  a  Petition 
to  both  Houses  of  Parliament  on  the  subject.  Its  purport 
will  be  gathered  from  its  opening  sentences  : — "  Your  Peti- 
tioners are  sincerely  attached  to  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  and  entirely  disapprove  of  any  changes  therein  at 
the  present  time.  That  your  Petitioners  believe  it  to  be  the 
true  exposition  of  God's  Holy  Word,  and  that  to  alter  it,  as 
proposed,  would  be  to  make  it  contrary  to  God's  Word."  ^ 
This,  be  it  remarked,  was  not  a  Petition  against  the  principle 
of  Prayer  Book  Revision.  It  was  simply  inexpedient  for 
them  that  it  should  take  place  "  at  the  present  time,"  when 
it  would  certainly  not  have  been  conducted  on  Ritualistic 
lines  ;  and  therefore  they  naturally  objected  to  it  "  as  pro- 
posed "  by  that  valiant  champion  of  Protestantism,  Lord 
Ebury.  And  here  I  would  impress  upon  my  readers  the 
fact  that  the  Ritualists  are  by  no  means  opponents  of 
Prayer  Book  Revision  ;  on  the  contrary,  many  of  their 
leaders  are  in  favour  of  it.  One  of  their  most  prominent 
and  learned  champions,  the  late  Rev.  Dr.  Littledale,  who 
was  one  of  the  leading  members  of  the  Council  of  the 
English  Church  Union,  published  in  1867  a  pamphlet  in 
favour  of  Prayer  Book  Revision  : — 

"The  Rubrics,"  said  Dr.  Littledale,  "at  the  end  of  the  Com- 
munion Office  are  in  sore  need  of  revision.     The  first  three  should 

^   Union,  December  30,  1859,  p.  823. 

"^  First  Annual  Report  of  the  English  Church  Union,  p.  22. 
3  History  of  the  English   Church  Union.     By  the  Rev.   G.  Bayfield  Roberts, 
p.  16.     London  :  Church  Printing  Co.     1895. 


410  HISTORY    OP^    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

be  totally  expunged.  They  have  worked  incalculable  mischief.  .  .  . 
So  of  the  two  following  Rubrics.  ...  So  of  the  Rubric  enjoining 
the  reverent  consumption  of  the  elements."  ^ 

"  The  Confirmation  Office  needs  two  alterations.  The  restora- 
tion of  Chrism  and  the  sign  of  the  Cross."  ^ 

"I  now  come  to  the  subject  of  primary  importance,  compared 
with  which  all  that  has  gone  before  is  light.  I  mean  the  Com- 
munion Office.  It  is  impossible  for  any  English  Liturgical  scholar 
to  behold  it  in  its  present  condition,  and  to  compare  it  with  the 
glorious  rite  of  Sarum,  or  even  with  Edward  VI.'s  First  Book,  without 
being  bowed  down  with  shame,  grief  and  indignation  at  the  enormous 
ivrong-doing  which  ivas  perpetrated,  and  the  apathy  with  which  it  has 
been  so  long  regarded.  .  .  .  There  is  no  Christian  doctrine  more 
prominent  in  the  Primitive  Liturgies  and  the  Early  Fathers  than 
that  of  the  Eucharistic  Sacrifice,  and  its  intimate  union  with  the  Offer- 
ing on  Calvary.  There  is  tione  fnore  studio2isly  obscured  by  the  English 
formularies,  and  albeit  theologians  know  that  it  is  still  there,  though 
hidden,  yet  ordinary  readers  may  well  fail  to  discover  it.  Our  plain 
duty  to  souls,  to  ourselves,  and  to  those  branches  of  the  Church 
which,  in  this  more  happy  than  zve  [he  means,  of  course,  the  Roman 
and  Eastern  Churches],  have  preserved  the  doctrine  intact,  is  to 
bring  it  once  more  into  due  prominence.  First,  then,  the  word 
*  Altar^  needs  to  be  restored.  It  is  quite  right  to  retain  the  word  Table 
occasionally,  in  order  to  prevent  the  idea  of  Communion  being  thrown 
into  the  shade,  but  the  other  is  the  earlier,  more  universal,  and  more 
appropriate  term.  Next,  the  liberty  of  removing  the  Holy  Table,  now 
practically  abrogated,  should  be  formally  ivithdrawn,  and  the  position 
of  the  priest  should  be  defined  so  as  to  prevent  the  present  most  un- 
seemly and  irreverent  use  of  celebrating  at  the  North  End.  .  .  . 
Next,  it  ought  to  be  provided  that  the  accustomed  Ornaments,  to 
wit,  a  Cross  or  Crucifix,  and  not  less  than  two  Lights,  shall  stand 
upon  the  Altar  at  the  time  of  celebration,  and  that  the  Priest  shall 
be  properly  vested  in  Alb  and  Chasuble,  &c."  ^ 

Now  I  need  hardly  remark  that  if  Prayer  Book  Revision 
on  these  lines  were  carried  out,  it  would  make  it  morally 
impossible  for  any  Protestant  Minister  to  officiate  in  the 
Church  of  England.  And  that  is,  I  believe,  just  what,  in 
their  heart  of  hearts,  the  Ritualists  desire  above  all  things 
— the  expulsion  of  Protestant  clergymen,  not  directly,  but 

1  Catholic  Revision.     By  Richard  F.  Liltledale,  LL.D.,  pp.  26,  27.     London: 
Palmer.     1867. 

"^  Ibid.  p.  28.  *  Ibid.  pp.  21,  22. 


PROSECUTING  EVANGELICAL  CLERGYMEN     411 

by  a  side  wind.  And  if  Parliament  does  not  refuse 
the  present  demand  of  High  Churchmen  to  hand  over 
the  government  of  the  Church  to  the  clergy  who  compose 
her  Convocations,  with  a  merely  nominal  control  by  the 
Legislature,  Prayer  Book  Revision  on  these  Romanising 
lines  may,  ere  long,  become  an  alarming  fact. 

There  was  another  subject  of  interest  which  occupied 
the  attention  of  the  E.C.U.  during  the  first  year  of  its 
existence.  For  some  time  previously  Sunday  Services  for 
the  People  had  been  held  in  Exeter  Hall,  and  Theatres,  at 
which  many  eminent  Church  of  England  Clergymen  and 
Nonconformist  Ministers  had  preached  the  Gospel  to 
immense  congregations,  and  with  the  most  blessed  results. 
But  these  services  were  an  abomination  in  the  eyes  of  the 
Ritualists  of  the  day.  Referring  to  the  Vicar  of  St.  Michael's, 
Burleigh  Street,  in  whose  parish  Exeter  Hall  is  situated,  the 
Union  said : — "Mr.  Edouart  might  as  well  shut  up  his  Church 
and  take  a  holiday  so  long  as  this  monster  conventicle  at 
Exeter  Hall  is  braying  away  in  his  ears,  with  Dr.  Tait's 
connivance."  ^  This  Vicar  did  all  that  lay  in  his  power  to 
stop  the  Exeter  Hall  Services,  though  they  in  no  way 
interfered  with  the  attendance  at  his  own  Church.  He  ap- 
pealed to  the  Bishop,  who  told  him  that  he  would  take  the 
responsibility  from  off  his  shoulders,  and  so,  after  a  vain 
struggle,  the  Vicar  gave  up  the  contest,  and  withdrew  his 
active  opposition,  under  protest.  But  when  he  dropped  the 
case,  the  new  English  Church  Union  took  it  up,  at  least 
so  far  as  it  related  to  Theatres,  and  endeavoured  to  settle 
the  question  by  a  prosecution  of  the  clergymen  who  dared 
to  preach  the  Gospel  in  such  places.  First  of  all,  they 
obtained  a  legal  opinion  from  Dr.  Phillimore,  and  after  that 
they  set  about  the  task  of  finding  a  man  qualified  and  willing 
to  act  as  an  aggrieved  prosecutor.  But  all  their  efforts  in 
this  direction  were  in  vain.  They  discovered  that  the  only 
man  who  could  act  as  prosecutor  was  the  Vicar,  and  he 
was  unwilling  to  act.  So  in  grief  and  with  much  wailing, 
the  English  Church  Union  had  to  give  up  the  case,  and 
afterwards  relate  what  they  had  done  to  their  disappointed 

'   Union,  July  23,  1858,  p.  476. 


412  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

subscribers,  in  their  annual  report.     And  this  is  what  the 
Committee  of  the  Union  said  : — 

"Your  Committee  have  next  to  report  that  the  attention  of  the 
Society  has  been  directed  to  the  great  scandal  which  has  been  given 
by  certain  clergymen  of  the  Church  of  England,  consorting  with 
Dissenting  preachers,  in  the  use  of  Theatres  for  public  worship,  in 
London  and  elsewhere. 

"An  opinion  upon  the  legality  of  such  proceedings  has  been 
obtained  from  Dr.  Phillimore,  by  the  Society,  and  published  in  the 
newspapers ;  but  the  difficulty  of  '  promoting  the  office  of  Judge '  in 
the  Ecclesiastical  Courts  against  offenders  is  very  great ;  and,  indeed, 
it  cannot  be  promoted  at  all  except  at  the  instance  of  the  Incumbent 
of  the  parish  in  which  the  Theatre  is  situated.  It  does  not,  therefore, 
appear  to  your  Committee  that  there  is  any  hope  of  putting  down 
this  profane  and  degrading  practice  by  an  appeal  to  the  law."  ^ 

The  Union  might  easily  have  abstained  from  such  a 
display  of  narrow-minded  bigotry  as  was  exhibited  by 
terming  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  in  Theatres  "  a  great 
scandal,"  and  even  a  "profane  and  degrading  practice." 
But  the  most  important  thing  to  notice  in  connection  with 
this  case,  is  the  startling  fact  that,  in  the  very  first  year 
of  its  existence,  the  English  Church  Union  endeavoured 
to  get  up  an  ecclesiastical  prosecution  of  Evangelical  clergy, 
for  an  alleged  breach  of  the  law.  And  when  we  remember 
how,  a  few  years  since,  this  self-same  Union  denounced  the 
wickedness  of  ecclesiastical  prosecutions,  zvhen  their  friends 
were  the  defendants,  and  literally  howled  with  rage,  and  even 
appealed  to  the  sympathies  of  the  public  with  whining 
tears,  it  makes  one  feel  an  utter  contempt  for  such  in- 
consistent conduct.  The  position  of  the  E.C.U.  with 
respect  to  prosecutions  seems  to  be  well  expressed  in  the 
words  of  the  big  and  cowardly  schoolboy  : — "  I  may  hit 
you  ;  but  you  musn't  hit  me  ! " 

And  here  I  may  be  permitted  to  mention  a  few  facts  prov- 
ing the  great  admiration  of  the  English  Church  Union  for 
Ecclesiastical  Prosecutions  in  its  early  days.  In  February 
i860  the  celebrated  Essays  and  Reviews  appeared,  contain- 
ing seven  Essays  written  respectively  by  Frederick  Temple, 
D.D.,  now  Archbishop  of  Canterbury ;  Rowland  Williams, 

^  First  Annual  Report  of  the  English  Church  Union,  pp.  23,  24. 


THE    E.C.U.    AND    PROSECUTIONS  413 

D.D. ;  Baden  Powell,  M.A. ;  Henry  B.  Wilson,  B.D. ; 
Mark  Pattison,  B.D. ;  Rev.  Benjamin  Jowett,  M.A.;  and 
C.  W.  Goodwin,  M.A.  A  letter  was  written,  signed  by  all 
the  Bishops  in  England  and  Ireland,  expressing  disappro- 
bation of  certain  opinions  attributed  to  the  writers,  and  in 
July  1864,  the  book  was  condemned  by  both  Houses  of 
Convocation.  But,  meanwhile,  the  High  Church  Bishop 
of  Salisbury  (Dr.  W.  K.  Hamilton)  decided  to  prosecute 
separately  one  of  the  Essayists,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Rowland 
Williams,  who  was  Vicar  of  Broad  Chalke,  in  the  Diocese 
of  Salisbury.  The  Ritualistic  party  hailed  the  prosecution 
with  the  utmost  delight,  nor  were  Evangelical  Churchmen 
behindhand  in  their  approval.  Canon  Liddon  says  that 
"  Bishop  Hamilton's  action  in  instituting  the  suit  against 
Dr.  Williams  was  warmly  supported  by  Pusey,  who  was 
at  first  as  sanguine  about  its  results  as  he  was  convinced 
of  its  necessity."  ^  The  English  Church  Union  hailed  the 
prosecution  with  unbounded  delight.  In  their  second 
annual  report,  in  1861,  the  Council  of  the  Union  referred 
to  the  institution  of  a  suit  by  the  Bishop  of  Salisbury  against 
Dr.  Williams  in  the  Ecclesiastical  Court  of  Arches  : — 

"A  suit,  after  the  most  mature  deliberation,  has  been  com- 
menced by  the  Bishop  of  Salisbury.  The  Couficii  commend  him  and 
his  sacred  cause  to  the  prayers  and  good  offices  of  the  Union,  though 
experience  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Courts,  as  now  constituted,  in  these 
our  unhappy  intestine  wars,  proves  that  the  issue  must  be  doubtful."  2 

The  charges  against  Dr.  Williams  were  of  a  most  serious 
character,  involving  doctrines  of  great  importance,  yet  in 
the  opinion  of  the  E.C.U.,  in  1861,  the  existing  Ecclesias- 
tical Courts  were  capable  of  giving  judgment  on  them. 
At  that  time  it  was  thought  by  the  Union  that  to  prosecute 
all  clerical  offenders  against  the  Church's  laws  was  the 
bounden  duty  of  every  Bishop.  The  Church  Review  was 
then  the  property  of  the  E.C.U.,  and  was  edited  by  its 
secretary.  Commenting  on  the  prosecution  of  Dr.  Williams, 
it  asked : — 

"  How  can  a  Bishop  be  ready,  as  he  is  under  so  solemn  a  vow  to 
be,  to  '  banish  and  drive  away  all  erroneous  and  strange  doctrine, 

^  Life  of  Dr.  Pusey,  vol.  iv.  p.  43. 

"^  Second  Annual  Report  of  the  English  Church  Union,  p.  15. 


414  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

contrary  to  God's  Word,'  if,  when  one  of  his  clergy  writes  and 
pubUshes  an  infidel  work,  he  will  not  use  the  means  which  the  law 
provides  for  making  an  example  of  him  to  his  diocese  and  to  the 
Church?"! 

In  the  following  year  the  E.C.U.  demanded  that  the 
Evangelical  Bishop  of  Carlisle  (as  well  as  Bishop  Colenso) 
should  be  compelled  to  retract  his  Protestant  opinion  as  to 
Baptismal  Regeneration,  or  be  prosecuted : — 

"  We  call  upon  all  our  fellow-Churchmen,"  said  the  Church 
Review,  "who  take  an  interest  in  the  maintenance  of  the  Catholic 
faith,  to  unite  in  this  our  remonstrance,  and  to  join  with  us  in  the 
demand  that  the  heretical  bishops  [i.e.  Waldegrave  and  Colenso] 
shall  be  called  to  account;  and  unless  they  formally  retract  the 
wicked  errors  promulgated  by  them,  put  upon  their  trial.  If  we  be 
asked  to  point  out  the  tribunal  before  which  they  are  to  be  arraigned, 
we  answer,  according  to  the  latest  precedents  in  the  law  books, 
before  the  Archbishop,  who,  virtute  officii,  possesses  jurisdiction  over 
the  Bishops  of  his  province.  In  the  case  of  the  Bishop  of  Carlisle 
this  would  probably  be  held  sufficient ;  but  if  not,  or  in  the  case 
of  the  Bishop  of  Natal  (the  English  Ecclesiastical  law  not  being  in 
force  in  the  Cape  Colony),  let  proceedings  be  instituted  under  the 
old  Canon  Law  .  .  .  The  tribunal  so  constituted  has  power,  not 
only  to  inquire  into  the  accusation,  but  if  the  Bishop  arraigned 
before  it  be  found  guilty,  to  visit  his  offence  with  canonical  punish- 
ment, extending  to  deprivation,  and  even  to  deposition  and  degra- 
dation.^^ "^ 

If  the  English  Church  Union  could  at  that  time,  by  an 
Ecclesiastical  prosecution,  have  secured  the  deprivation, 
deposition,  and  degradation  of  the  Evangelical  Bishop 
Waldegrave,  it  would,  I  doubt  not,  have  shouted  aloud 
for  joy.  Their  hatred  of  the  Evangelical  party,  and  their 
desire  to  expel  them  from  the  Church  of  England,  comes 
out  very  clearly  in  the  leading  article  I  have  just  quoted 
from  the  official  organ  of  the  Union.  If  they  had  suc- 
ceeded, the  Union  would,  I  doubt  not,  have  been  as  much 
addicted  to  prosecuting  Protestants  as  the  Church  Asso- 
ciation afterwards  became  in  prosecuting  Ritualistic  law- 
breakers.   The  great  difference  between  these  two  societies 

^  Church  Review,  September  i86l,  p.  l66. 
^  Ibid.  May  17,  1862,  p.  301. 


THE    E.C.U.    AND    PROSECUTIONS  415 

is  that  the  E.C.U.  failedy  while  the  Church  Association 
succeeded  in  proving  their  opponents  to  be  law-breakers. 
And  although  we  have,  in  recent  years,  occasionally  heard 
assurances  from  certain  Ritualists  that  they  have  no  wish 
or  desire  to  expel  Evangelicals  from  the  Church,  I,  for  one, 
am  not  disposed  to  place  any  confidence  in  such  assurances. 
Give  but  the  English  Church  Union  the  power,  and  within 
ten  years  there  would  not  be  a  Protestant  clergyman  of 
Evangelical  views  left  within  the  Church  of  England,  and 
then  we  should  soon  have  a  Church  willing,  anxious,  and 
ready  to  fraternise  with  the  Pope,  and  submit  once  more 
to  Papal  supremacy- 
There  was  one  thing  which  troubled  the  English 
Church  Union  very  much.  Ecclesiastical  prosecutions  of 
clergy  were  very  cumbersome,  costly,  and  prolonged,  and 
therefore,  at  its  ordinary  meeting,  held  in  the  offices  on 
April  7,  1862,  the  President  (the  Hon.  Colin  Lindsay)  in 
the  chair,  a  resolution  was  carried  demanding  that  pro- 
secutions, not  only  of  priests,  but  even  of  Archbishops  and 
Bishops,  should  be  facilitated — so  anxious  were  they  to 
put  down  all  their  opponents  by  the  strong  arm  of  the  law ! 
The  resolution  was  as  follows : — 

"  That,  -vihWst  facilitating  the  bringing  to  trial  of  priests  for  heresy 
and  breaches  of  Church  discipline  and  morality,  there  should  be  a 
mode  of  procedure  laid  down  for  dealing  with  Archbishops  and 
Bishops,  if  they  should  offend  against  the  law."^ 

The  Great  Exhibition,  held  in  1862,  brought  to  our 
shores  a  large  number  of  foreign  Protestant  pastors. 
Several  of  them  were  invited  by  Evangelical  clergymen  to 
officiate  in  their  churches.  The  English  Church  Union 
was  greatly  alarmed  when  it  heard  the  news,  and  at  once 
took  energetic  action,  and  at  its  annual  meeting  in  June 
the  Council  reported: — "The  Council  have  drawn  the 
Bishop  of  London's  attention  to  the  subject,  with  the  view 
of  inducing  him  to  exert  his  authority,  as  his  lordship's 
lamented  predecessor,  Bishop  Blomfield,  did  in  1851  ;  and 
have  also  submitted  a  case  for  the  opinion  of  eminent  counsel, 
in  order  to  determine  upon  the  best  mode   of  enforcing  the 

^  Chunk  Review,  April  12,  1862,  p.  229, 


41 6  HISTORY    OF    THE    ROMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

law."'^  In  quoting  this  it  must  not  be  supposed  that  I 
object  to  the  E.C.U.,  or  anybody  else,  "enforcing  the 
law."  Evangelical  Churchmen  are  not  afraid  of  the  law, 
and  are  quite  willing  to  obey  it.  Of  course,  the  Church 
Review  applauded  the  action  of  the  Council.  One  might 
almost  think,  in  reading  the  following  comments  of  that 
newspaper,  that  he  was  reading  the  present  official  organ 
of  the  Church  Association  : — 

"  It  is  not  the  fault  of  the  English  Church  Union  that  the 
Unordained  Foreign  '  Protestant  Pastors '  are  allowed  to  persist  in 
setting  both  the  law  of  the  Church  and  the  law  of  the  land  at 
defiance,  by  officiating  in  chapels  of  the  Church  of  England  in  this 
metropolis.  True  to  the  obligations  of  an  Association  established 
for  the  purpose  of  defending  and  maintaining  unimpaired  the  dis- 
cipline as  well  as  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England,  her  Council 
have  earnestly  endeavoured  to  enforce  the  law  which  requires  that  no 
one  shall  presume  to  officiate  ministerially  in  any  of  the  places  of 
worship  of  the  Church  who  is  not  in  her  Holy  Orders,  and  thereby 
duly  qualified  for  the  sacred  charge.  But  as  they  with  whom,  after 
all,  the  duty  rests  of  giving  practical  eiTect  to  the  requirements  of  the 
law  refuse  to  act  in  the  case,  the  Council  are  unable,  without 
embarking  in  an  expensive  and  probably  protracted  course  of 
litigation,  to  do  more  than  they  have  done  in  pursuance  of  that 
object."  2 

It  will  be  observed  that  in  "endeavouring  to  enforce  the 
law,"  the  E.C.U.  is  described  as  "true  to  the  obligations" 
with  which  it  commenced  its  career.  Unfortunately  for 
the  Union,  there  seems  to  be  no  law  left  in  1900  for  //  to 
enforce.  The  law  is  on  the  side  of  Protestant  Churchmen. 
In  this  same  year  the  Rev.  D.  I.  Heath,  Vicar  of  Brading, 
Isle  of  Wight,  was  condemned  by  the  Judicial  Committee  of 
Privy  Council  for  teaching  certain  Broad  Church  doctrines 
contrary  to  the  teaching  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  it 
confirmed  the  sentence  of  deprivation  of  his  living  passed 
upon  him  by  the  Court  below.  And  this  is  the  way  in 
which  the  English  Church  Union,  through  its  official  organ, 
hailed  with  great  satisfaction  the  judgment  of  the  now 
hated  "  State  "  Court.     This  is  what  it  said  :— "  This,  then, 

^  Third  A7tnual  Report  of  the  English  Church  Union,  p.  15, 
*  Church  Review,  July  26,  1862,  p.  459. 


E.C.U.    PRAISE    OF    PROSECUTIONS  417 

is  substantially  the  judgment  of  the  Privy  Council  in  the 
case  in  question.  And  one  who  has  been  proved  guilty  of 
such  an  anomaly  and  scandal,  and  refuses  to  revoke  his 
errors,  is  justly  sentenced  to  deprivation.  Let  us  hope  it  will 
act  as  a  salutary  warning."  ^  One  of  the  strongest  defences 
of  suppressing  lawlessness  in  the  Church  by  the  strong  arm 
of  the  law,  was  published  by  the  English  Church  Union,  in 
its  official  organ,  early  in  1863.  It  is  well  worth  reading. 
The  article  was  headed  "  Prosecutions  for  Heresy,"  and  in 
reply  to  those  who  objected  to  prosecutions  it  said : — 

"  Now,  to  all  this  ribald  nonsense  we  simply  reply  that  a  tainted 
sheep  is  removed  from  the  tiock,  not  for  his  punishment — save  as 
that  punishment  may  be  the  means  of  recovery  to  health — but  that 
the  rest  of  the  flock  may  not  be  infected.  To  silence  the  teacher  of 
heresy  is  the  plaifi  duty  of  the  Churches  governors.  AVhether  that 
silence  shall  be  only  for  a  definite  time,  or  for  life,  or  until  the 
offender  has  purged  himself  of  his  wrong-doing,  ought  to  depend 
upon  the  particulars  of  each  offence.  But  the  object  of  the 
temporary  pimishment  of  an  heretical  priest  must  be  always  con- 
sidered to  be,  first,  the  protection  of  the  flock  entrusted  to  his  charge 
from  his  pernicious  influence ;  and,  next,  his  own  correction,  with  a 
view  to  a  recantation  of  his  error,  and  his  submission  to  her  judg- 
ment who  has  authority  '  in  controversies  of  faith.'  If  any  one  is  so 
unmindful  of  his  Ordination  vows  as  to  write  against  the  faith  to 
which  they  have  solemnly  committed  him,  he  can  only  be  dealt  with 
by  the  action  of  the  lazv.  It  is  the  only  means  by  which  he  can  be  set 
right.  And  right  he  must  be  set,  or  he  will  make  others  go  wrong. 
How  can  the  man  who  is  himself  in  doubt  teach  others  the  truth  ? 
And  if  he  have  disqualified  himself  from  discharging  the  prophet's 
office,  why  should  he  take  the  prophet's  pay  ?  .  .  .  The  Church's 
revenues  are  for  the  teaching  of  the  Church's  faith.  Let  those  who 
do  not  hold  tliat  faith  be  restrained  from  the  sacrilege  of  appropriat- 
ing funds  which  have  been  provided  to  teach  and  maintain  it."  ^ 

Dr.  Pusey  formed  one  of  "  thi^ce  aggrieved"  ones,  who,  in 
1863,  prosecuted  for  heresy  Professor  Jowett,  late  Master 
of  Balliol  College,  Oxford,  but  with  the  result  that  the  case 
against  Professor  Jowett  was  dismissed  by  the  Oxford 
Chancellor's  Court.  Dr.  Pusey  found  it  necessary,  before 
the  case  was  heard,  to  write  to  the  Times,  of  February  19, 

1   Church  Review,  June  14,  1862,  p.  362. 
-  Ibid.  January  31,  1863,  p.  II3. 

2   D 


41 8  HISTORY    OF    THE    HOMEWARD    MOVEMENT 

1863,  a  defence  of  Ecclesiastical  Prosecutions,  in  which  he 
said: — ^*  Prosecution  is  not  persecution.  It  would  be  an  evil 
day  for  England  when  it  should  be  recognised  that  to  appeal 
to  the  majesty  of  the  law  is  to  contravene  truth  and  justice." 
The  Church  Review  was  delighted  with  Pusey's  letter,  and 
burst  forth  in  praise  of  prosecutors.     It  said  : — 

"  None  better  than  Dr.  Pusey  know  the  difference  between 
prosecution  and  persecution.  There  is  something  noble  in  the  learned 
Professor's  vindication  of  the  majesty  of  law.  Evil  day,  indeed,  will 
it  be  for  England  when  it  shall  be  deemed  an  act  of  cruelty  to 
afford  a  man  accused  of  wrong  the  opportunity  of  purging  himself 
from  that  accusation  by  the  solemn  process  of  a  legal  inquiry. 
Dark  will  be  the  gloom  which  obscures  the  horizon  of  England's 
Church  when  there  shall  not  be  to  be  found  among  her  softs  any  %vho 
will  have  the  moral  courage  to  bring  before  the  Courts  to  which  they 
may  be  amenable  those  ivho  are  eftgaged  in  poisoning  the  streams  of 
religious  knowledge  at  their  very  fountain  head^  ^ 

In  1864  the  English  Church  Union  unanimously  passed 
a  resolution  to  start  a  fund  to  assist  in  prosecuting  Bishop 
Colenso.^  At  its  annual  meeting  the  same  year  the  Presi- 
dent of  the  E.C.U.  actually  declared  that  it  was  the  duty  of 
the  Union  to  obey  the  decisions  of  the  Law  Courts.  He 
said  : — "  With  respect  to  discipline  the  same  argument 
applies.  That  which  has  been  laid  down  in  the  Canon  Law, 
and  has  been  received  and  acted  upon  in  the  Church, 
especially  in  her  Courts  of  fudicature,  we  are,  I  think,  clearly 
bound  to  'defend  and  maintain  unimpaired.'"^  I  do  not 
think  the  present  President  of  the  English  Church  Union 
would  make  such  a  declaration  now. 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  in  its  early  years  the  English 
Church  Union  paraded  itself  before  the  public  as  the  great 
maintainer  of  law  and  order  in  the  Church.  And  so — to 
do  it  credit — it  continued,  until  it  found  that  law  and  order 
were  against  its  sacerdotal  and  Romanising  claims.  From 
that  time  it  has  slowly  adopted  the  principles  of  rebellion 
against  every  law  and  order  in  the  Church  opposed  to  its 
preposterous   claims,    and    has,    in   practice,   approved   of 

^  Church  Review,  February  21,  1863,  p.  183. 
2  Ibid.  March  19,  1864,  p.  285. 
*  Ibid.  June  18,  1864,  p.  603. 


E.C.U.    SECESSIONS    TO    ROME  419 

every  clergyman  of  the  Ritualistic  party  being  a  Pope  to 
himself,  and  the  embodiment  of  ecclesiastical  anarchy.^ 

The  English  Church  Union  has  been  the  best  friend  to 
the  Church  of  Rome  seen  in  England  since  the  Reforma- 
tion. It  has,  indeed,  in  only  too  many  instances,  been  the 
Preparatory  School  for  Rome.  In  how  many  it  is  impos- 
sible for  me  to  say.  But  I  have  discovered  that  the 
78  clergymen  in  the  Church  of  England,  mentioned  in  the 
Appendix  on  the  next  page,  were  members  of  the  English 
Church  Union  when  they  seceded  to  Rome.  I  challenge 
the  Ritualists  to  produce  a  list  of  those  who  have  seceded 
to  Rome  direct  from  the  ranks  of  the  Church  Association. 
I  do  not  think  they  could  hnd  even  one. 

Here  for  the  present  I  must  close,  reserving  for  a  future 
occasion  my  general  comments  on  the  Romeward  Move- 
ment, and  what  ought  to  be  the  Evangelical  policy  towards 
it.  We  can  learn  many  things  even  from  our  opponents, 
and  it  may  be  well  if  the  Evangelical  party  were  to  learn  from 
them  the  wisdom  of  paying  more  attention  to  the  outward 
organisation  of  the  Church.  Those,  on  the  other  hand, 
who  value  some  of  the  Romanising  changes  introduced  by 
the  Ritualists,  would  do  well  to  remember  that  it  is  pos- 
sible to  pay  too  heavily  for  even  good  things.  To  secure 
musical  services,  and  histrionic  performances,  by  a  sacri- 
fice of  our  Christian  liberty  to  priestly  bondage,  is  at  best 
a  poor  bargain. 

^  Further  information  on  the  attitude  of  the  E.C.U.  towards  Ecclesiastical 
Prosecutions  may  be  found  in  the  pamphlet,  Ecclesiastical  Prosecutions,  Origin- 
ated and  Advocated  by  the  English  Church  Union.  By  Walter  Walsh,  pp.  8. 
London  :  Church  Association,  141  Buckingham  Street,  W.C. 


APPENDIX 


A  List  of  Clerical  Members  of  the  English  Church 
Union  who  have  Seceded  to  Rome. 


Akers,  Rev.  George 
Andrews,  Rev.  Septimus 
Angus,  Rev.  George 
Barlow,  Rev.  T.  W. 
Barnes,  Rev.  A.  S. 
Barnes,  Rev.  Thomas 
Bennett,  Rev.  Morden 
Boothby,  Rev.  Herbert 
Briggs,  Rev.  H.  C. 
Bromage,  Rev.  R.  R. 
Camm,  Rev.  J.  Brooke 
Camm,  Rev.  R.  P. 
Cane,  Rev.  V.  C.  B. 
Chase,  Rev.  C.  H. 
Clarke.  Rev.  A.  G. 
Conder,  Rev.  R.  F.  R. 
Cooke,  Rev.  W.  A. 
Corrance,  Rev.  H.  C. 
Darlington,  Rev.  Joseph 
Davis,  Rev.  T. 
Donaldson,  Rev.  A.  M. 
Duthie,  Rev.  C.  J. 
Duthoit,  Rev.  W. 
Egerton,  Rev.  J. 
Eskrigge,  Rev.  J. 
Farman,  Rev.  S. 
Fawkes,  Rev.  A. 
Filmer,  Rev.  J.  H. 
Fletcher,  Rev.  Philip 
Foster,  Rev.  C.  G. 
Fownes,  Rev.  J.  E.  C. 
Godley,  Rev.  R.  J.  D. 
Gorman,  Rev.  G.  T. 
Greene,  Rev.  Joseph  J. 
Grindle,  Rev.  E.  S. 
Grisewood,  Rev.  H. 
Hardy,  Rev.  H.  J. 
Hickman,  Rev.  H. 
Hoare,  Rev.  J.  W.  D. 


Hodson,  Rev.  C.  E. 

Hope,  Rev.  Douglas 

Hunnybun,  Rev.  W.  M. 

Jackson,  Rev.  Edmund 

Kennard,  Rev.  C. 

King,  Rev.  Owen  C. 

Lord,  Rev.  F.  B. 

Lyall,  Rev.  W. 

Madan,  Rev.  J.  R. 

Mather,  Rev.  F.  H.  V. 

Maturin,  Rev.  B.  W. 

Milton,  Rev.  A.  T. 

Newdegate,  Rev.  A. 

North,  Rev.  H.  W. 

Osborne,  Rev.  Lord  T.  Godolphin 

Paine,  Rev.  A.  H. 

Parker,  Rev.  H.  M. 

Phillipps-Treby,  Rev.  E.  M. 

Powell,  Rev.  A.  H. 

Rivington,  Rev.  Luke 

Russell,  Rev.  H.  P. 

Sankey,  Rev.  R.  B. 

Sharpe,  Rev.  A.  B, 

Shipley,  Rev.  Orby 

Sperling,  Rev.  J.  H. 

Sproston,  Rev.  S. 

Stanley,  Rev.  the  Hon.  A.  G. 

Tatlock,  Rev.  W. 

Tatum,  Rev.  G.  B. 

Theed,  Rev.  E.  A. 

Tydd,  Rev.  T.  H. 

Walls,  Rev.  C.  J. 

Watson,  Rev.  E.  J. 

Wedgwood,  Rev.  R. 

Westall,  Rev.  A.  St.  L. 

White,  Rev.  J.  B. 

Wilson,  Rev.  H.  L. 

Wood,  Rev.  R.  S. 

Wyndham,  Rev.  F.  M. 


INDEX 


Acton,  Cardinal,  startling  letter  to,  196, 

197 
Adapted     Roman     books,    quotations 

from,  242-244 

Newman's  opinion  of,  241 

Bishop  Hamilton  on,  241 

Bishop  Wilberforce  on,  242 

Bishop  Blomfield  on,  245 

— —  Dr.  Hook  says  they  "  will  make 

men  infidels,"  242 
Alderson,  Baron,  307 
Allies,  Rev.  T.  W.,  239 

pays  "a  sacred  debt  to  tlie  Roman 

Church,"  305 

writes  in  defence  of  a  Church  he 

"thoroughly  hated,"  304 

exercises  a    "  laudable  subtlety," 

305 
claims  to  hold  Roman  doctrine, 

3°7  .    . 

his  interview  with  the  Pope,  30S 

and  Bishop  Wilberforce,  304-308 

extracts    from    his    /oiirnal    in 

France,  305,  306 

Altars,  condemned  by  the  Judicial 
Committee   of  Privy    Council,    264, 

359 

Bishop  Gilbert  on,  291 

Apostolic      succession,     accepted      by 

Froude,   Keble,   Palmer,   and  New- 
man, 9 
Argyll,  Duke  of,  on  Protestant  unity, 

Arnold,  Rev.  Dr.  Thomas,  his  Prin- 
ciples of  Church  Reform,  26-28 

on  the  rights  of  laymen,  26 

on  Tract  X.,  44 

on  Tract  XC,  154 

Ashley,  Lord,  and  the  Jerusalem 
Bishopric,  202-205,  210. 

Association  of  Friends  of  the  Church, 

33-37 

its  real  objects,  34,  35 

Association  for  the  promotion  of  the 
Unity  of  Christendom,  The,  349-357 

its  founders'  traitorous  and  secret 

message  to  the  Pope,  356 

Auricular  Confession,  Pusey's  Protes- 
tant notes  on,  133-13S 


Auricular  Confession,  Pusey  afraid  to 
practise,  132 

Pusey    goes    to,    for    first    time, 

m  . 

— —  Bishop    Blomfield    denounces    a 

preacher  of,  271 
and  Clerical  Retreats,  282,  283 

Episcopal    inquiry    into,    at    St. 

Saviour's,  Leeds,  321-325 

wives  and,  321 

questioning  women  on  the  Seventh 

Commandment  defended,  324,   325, 

378,  379 

a    Plymouth  inquiry  concerning, 

337,  338 

Puseyite   identical   with  Roman, 

35' 

charges  against  the   Rev.  Alfred 

Poole  as  to,  374-380 

Bagot,  Bishop,  on  the  Tracts  for  the 

Times,  107,  108,  222,  223 
and  the  Oxford  Martyrs  Memorial, 

112,  119 

on  Tract  XC,  166-168,  222. 

on    the    proposal     to     prosecute 

Pusey,  233 
Barnabo,  Cardinal,  De  Lisle's  startling 

revelations  to,  352-354 

reply  from  to  De  Lisle,  354 

Barnes  v.  Shore,  273-276 

Bateman,  Mr.  James,  and  Theological 

Colleges,  388,  3!;'9 
Bath  Judgment,  The,  344-346 

protest  against,  348 

Beckett,  Rev.  H.  F.,  on  the  Confessions 

of  wives,  323 
Belaney  v.  Totton,  234 
Bellasis,  Mr.  Serjeant,  139 
Bennett,  Rev.  W.  J.  E.,  317-320 
the   Bishop  of   London  and   the, 

317-320 
Bickersteth,  Rev.  E.,  on  the  Library  of 

the  Fathers,  90 
Bird,  Bishop,  replies  to  Protestant  pro- 
tests, 237 
Blachford,  Lord,  on  Cranmer,  ill,  217 
Blackburn,    Protest   against    Puseyism 

from,  237 


422 


INDEX 


Black  Gown  in  the  Pulpit,  The,  de- 
clared to  be  legal,  248 

at  Exeter,  268,  269 

Blomfield,  Bishop,  prosecutes  the  Rev. 
F.  Oakeley,  141-143 

censures  Ti-act  XC,  179 

on    "Adapted"    Roman    books, 

245 

denounces  a  preacher  of  Auricular 

Confession,  271 

the    Romanising    party    severely 

censured  by,  316,  317 

Bloxam,  Rev.  J.  R.,  186 

his  traitorous  and  secret  negotia- 
tions with  De  Lisle,  186-191 

"a  living    and    moving    secret," 

Bolton,  Protest  against  Puseyism  from, 

237 

Bowden,  Mr.  J.  W.,  25,  89 

Boyle,  Dean,  on  the  effect  of  Pusey's 
Confessional  work,  280 

Brawling  in  Church,  case  of  Biirder  v. 
Laiigky,  235,  236 

B reeks  V.  IVoo/frey,  125-127 

Bricknell,  Rev.  W.  S.,  his  Judgment 
of  the  Bishops  upon  Tractarian  Theo- 
logy cited,  178,  179 

Brighton  Protestant  Defence  Commit- 
tee, 23 

Bristol    Church     Union,     The,     326- 

330 

a  "  Statement  of  Principles  "  of, 

328,  329 
opposed  by  Pusey  and  Keble,  328, 

330 
Bull,  Rev.  Henry,  400,  401 
Bunsen,  Baron,  on  Hampden's  election, 

80,  81 

and  Pastor  Sporlein,  117,  118 

and  the  Jerusalem  Bishopric,  201- 

204,  211 
Biirder  v.  Langley,  235,  236 
Burgon,  Dean,  396 
Butler,  Dean,  on  Clerical  Retreats,  282, 

283 

Cambridge,  Holy  Sepulchre  Church, 

restoration  of,  251-253 
judgment  in  case  of,  252,  253 

Camden    Society,  denounced   by 

Dr.  Close,  254 

Camoys,  Lord,  on  the  Puseyite  Move- 
ment, 234 

Candlesticks  and  Candles,  judgment  of 
Judicial  Committee  on,  359 

Cardwell's  Dcclrinal  Annals,  42 

Church,  Dean,  on  the  Evangelical 
Movement,  4 

on  the  Reformers,  1 1 1 


Church,  Dean,  on  the  contest  for  the 

Poetry  Professorship,  215 
Church  Unions,  326 
Church  and  State,  views  of  the  early 

Tractarians  on,  24-26 
Clerical  Retreats,  282,  283 
Close,  Rev.  Dr. ,  on  The  Restoration  Oj 

Churches  is  the  Restoration  of  Popery, 

254,  255 
Collette,    Mr.    Charles    Hastings,    on 

Newman's   ordination   as   a  Roman 

Catholic  priest,  261,  262 
Coloured  Cloths  on  Communion  Table, 

judgment  of  Judicial  Committee  on, 

359 
Confession  (see  "Auricular  Confession  ") 
Copleston,  Bishop,  censures  T?-act  XC, 
I        179 
Corporate   Reunion  with  Rome,   115- 

117,  159-164 

Pusey  on  the  basis  of,  144,  145 

secret  negotiations  with  Romanists 

for,  184-200 
Cowley    Fathers,    The,   on   priests  as 

peacemakers,  10 
Credence  Tables,  252,  253,  359 
Cross,  The,  on  the  Communion  Table, 

288,  289 

judgment   of  Bishop    Phillpotts, 

288 

Mr.  B.  Whitehead  on  the  law  as 

to,  289 

Crosses,  judgment  of  Judicial  Com- 
mittee on,  360 

Cuddesdon  Theological  College,  389- 
392,  394,  396,  404 

Dalgairns,  Mr.  J.  D.,  160,  257 

De  Lisle,  Mr.  Ambrose    Phillipps,  on 

Tract  IV.,  43 
on  Tract  XC,  165,  166 

becomes    a    secret   emissary   to 

Oxford,  185 

Newman  opens  his  heart  to,  185 

promises   to    bring  some  foreign 

Theologians  to  Oxford,  186 

his  secret  negotiations  with  the 

Oxford  leaders,  184-200 

his  first  visit  to  Oxford,  187 

letter  to  Cardinal  Barnabo,  352- 

354 
Denison,  Archdeacon,  330 
Bishop  Spencer's  correspondence 

with,  341-342 

the  Rev.  Joseph  Ditcher  pro- 
secutes, 342-346 

Ditcher  v.  Denison,  342-346 
Dodsworth,  Rev.  William,  exposure  of 

Pusey's  Confessional  practice  by,  309, 

310,  313 


INDEX 


423 


Dominic,  Father,  his  narrative  of  New- 
man's reception  into  the  Church  of 
Rome,  257,  258 

Dublin  Review,  115,  136 

on  Froude's  Remains,  20,  104 

East  Grinstead  Convent,  363-374 

Egerton  v.  All  of  Rode,  129,  130 

Elphinstone  v.  Putrhas,  289 

Embroidered  Lace  on  Communion 
Table,  judgment  of  Judicial  Com- 
mittee on,  359 

Ent^lisk  Churchman,  The,  started  by 
the  Puseyites,  238 

recommends   the   prosecution   of 

Evangelicals,  246,  247 

denounces   public   praying  in  an 

unconsecrated  place,  271,  272 

wishes  to  reduce  the  distance  to 

Rome,  289 
English  Church  Union,  The,  408-420 

the  first  founders  of,  408 

and  Prayer  Book  Revision,  409 

and  services  in  theatres,  411,  412 

attempt  to  prosecute  Evangelical 

clergy  by,  41 1,  412 
and    Essays    and  Reviews,   412, 

413 
praises  the  prosecution  of  the  Rev. 

Dr.  Rowland  Williams,  413 
wants   to   prosecute  Archbishops 

and  Bishops,  415 

demands  the  prosecution  of  the 

Evangelical  Bishop  of  Carlisle,  414 

obedience  to  the  Courts  promised 

by  the  President  of,  418 
list  of  Clerical  Seceders  to  Rome 

from  the  ranks  of,  420 
Episcopal    Veto,    The,    denounced   by 

Bishop  Phillpotts,  77 

judgments   of  Justices  Hill    and 

Wightman  on,  385,  386 

Evangelical  Churchmen  and  the 
Puritans,  3 

the  real  descendants  of  the  Pro- 
testant Reformers,  2 

Puseyite  anxiety  to  expel,  246-248 

Evangelical  Movement,  The,  Canon 
Liddon  on,  3 

Mr.  Gladstone  on,  4 

Mr.  H.  O.  Wakeman  on,  4 

Dean  Church  on,  4 

Lord  Shaftesbury  on,  5 

Earl  of  .Selborne  on,  5 

Rev.  W.  H.  B.  Proby  on,  5 

Mr.  Lecky  on,  6,  7 

not  a  supplement  to  the  Oxford 

Movement,  7-10 

Its  spiritual    and    philanthropic 

blessings,  3-7 


Exeter  Surplice  Riots,  268,  269 

Faber,  Rev.  F.  W.,  his  Sights  and 
Thoughts  in  Foreign  Churches,  218- 
220 

how  he  deceived  the  public,  218 

Faber,  Rev.  G.  Stanley,  102,  181, 
224 

Fasting,  Pusey's  Tract  on,  42 

Homily  on,  42 

Fathers,  The,  Pusey's  quotations  from, 

234 

Tractarians  and,  90,  91,  133 

Faussett,  Rev.  Dr.,  on  The  Revival  oj 

Popery,  99,  lOO 
denounces  Dr.  Pusey's  sermon  on 

the  Eucharist,  227 
Freeland  V.  Neale,  291,  292 
Freemantle,  Dean,  401 
Froude,  Rev.  R.  H.,  109 

on  Apostolic  Succession,  9 

on  Tradition  and  the  Bible,  1 1 

on  Church  and  State,  24,  25 

Extracts  from  his  Remains,  96,  97, 

Newman  on  the  opinions  of,  92 

Dr.  Hook  on  his  Remains,  106,  107 

Fust,  Sir  Herbert  Jenner,  Judgment  in 
the  Oakeley  Case,  142,  143 

Judgment  in  Breeks  v.  Woolfrey, 

126 
Judgment  in  Faulkener  v.  Litch- 
field, 252,  253 

Judgment    in    Barnes   v.    Shore, 

275,  276 

Judgment  in  Freelandv.  Neale,  291 

Judgment  in  Gorham  v.  Bishop  of 

Exeter,  294 

Garbett,  Rev.  James,  The,  contest 
for  the  Poetry  Professorship  at  Ox- 
ford by,  212-217 

attempt  to  prosecute  for  heresy, 

250 

Gilbert,  Bishop,  and  Sackville  College, 
290-292 

and  St  Margaret's,  East  Grin- 
stead,  365,  366 

Girdlestone,  Rev.  C,  37 

Gladstone,  Mr.  W.  E.,  on  Evangelical 
Churchmanship,  4 

describes  the  services  at  Margaret 

Chapel,  140 

and  St.  Saviour's,  Leeds,  287 

Golightly,  Rev.  C.  P.,  exposes  the 
Romanisers,  181,  182 

and  the  Lavington  case,  385,  386 

and  Cuddesdon  College,  389-392 

on   the   Alarming    State    of    the 

Diocese  of  Oxford,  393-404 


424 


INDEX 


Golightly  V.  the  Bishop  of  Chichester, 
385-386 

Goode,  Dean,  11,  91,  220-223,  301 

Gorham  Case,  The,  292-303 

Judgment  of  Sir  H.  Jenner  Fust 

in,  294 

Judgment  of  the  Judicial  Com- 
mittee of  Privy  Council  in,  295-297 

Clerical  Declaration  in  support  of 

judi,'ment  in,  336 

Griffiths,  Rev.  John,  154,  156 

Hadleigh,  Tractarian  Conference  at, 
29-31 

Newman's  report  of,  31 

Hamilton,  Bishop,  on  Pusey's  "Adap- 
ted "  Roman  books,  241 

Hampden,  Rev.  Dr.  R.  D.,  the  case  of 
the,  46-85 

appointed    Regius    Professor    of 

Divinity,  50 

• Lord  Melbourne  on  opposition  to, 

51,63 

Dean  Stanley  on  opposition  to,  54 

his  Letter  to  the  Archbishop    of 

Canterbury,  64 

appointed  Bishop  of  Hereford,  67 

protest  of  thirteen  Bishops,  67 

reply  of  the  Prime  Minister,  68 

Archdeacon    Hare's  reply  to  the 

critics  of,  69,  70 
Pusey  and  Keble  try  to  prosecute, 

72-77 
Election  of,  as  Bishop  of  Hereford, 

77-79,  82,  83 

protest  at  Bow  Church,  80 

addresses  of  sympathy  with,  83,  84 

Hare,  Archdeacon,  69,  70 
Hawker,  Rev.  John,  275 
Hawkins,  Rev.   Dr.,   55,   56,  84,  231, 

232 
Heath,  Rev.  D.  I.,  416 
Homilies,  The,  on  Prayer  for  the  Dead, 

126 
Homily  on  Fasting,  42 
Hook,  Rev.  Dr.,  on  the   Tracts  for  the 

TV'wiSi'andFroude's  Remains,  106, 107 

subscribes      to      the      Jerusalem 

Bishopric  Fund,  206 

the  Romanisers  denounced  by  the, 

207,  250,  322 

thinks  Pusey  under  Jesuit  influ- 
ence, 268 

charges  Pusey  with  Jesuitism,  285 

refuses    to    join     the    Yorkshire 

Church  Union,  330 

Hope-Scott,  Mr.  James  R.,  169,  238, 
260 

opposition    of,    to    the   Jerusalem 

Bishopric,  205,  206 


Islington  Clergy  and  High  Church 
principles,  loi 

Jelf,  Rev.  William  Edward,  on  Con- 
fession, 281 
Jelf,  Rev.  Dr.  W.  J.,  159 
Jerusalem  Bishopric,  The,  201-212 

Dr.  Hook  supports,  206-208 

Mr.  Gladstone  supports,  211 

Pusey's  bitter  opposition  to,  209, 

210 

Lord  Ashley  and,  202-205,  210 

Newman's   protest    against,  211, 

212 
Jesuitism,     Pusey     charged     with,    by 

Hook,  268,  285 
Jowett,    Professor,    prosecuted    by  Dr. 

Pusey,  417,  418 
Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council, 

The,  Archbishop  Tait  on,  331 
Judgment  of,  in  Liddellv.  Wester- 
ton,  253,  264,  359,  360 
Judgment  of,  in  Burderv.  Langley, 

236 
Judgment    of,  in   Gorhatn  v.   the 

Bishop  of  Exeter,  295-21*7 
Judgment  of,  in  Barnes  v.  Shore, 

276 

Lord  John  Russell  on,  332 

Judgment  in  Ditcher  v.  Denison, 

346 
Judgment    in    Martin    v.     Mac- 

konochie,  361 

Kebi-E,  Rev.  John,  author  of  the  Ox- 
ford Movement,  12 

his  sermon  on  National  Apos- 
tasy, 22 

tries  to  prosecute  Dr.  Hampden, 

72-77 

on  the  Reformers,  11 1 

on  Catholic  Subscription,  1 72-176 

Langley,  Rev.  W.  H.,  suspended  for 
Brawling   in  his  own  Church,  235, 
236 
Lavington  Case,  The,  381-3S7 
Lay  Address  to  the  Queen,  332-334 

• Royal  action  on  the,  334 

to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 

335 

Lecky,  Mr.,  on  the  Evangelical  Move- 
ment, 6,  7 

Leeds,  St.  Saviour's,  262-264,  284-287 

the  Rev.  Richard  Ward  and,  285, 

286 

Hook    terms    it    "a   semi-Papal 

colony,"  286 

traitorous  resolution  by  clergymen 

at,  321 


INDEX 


425 


Leeds,  St.  Saviour's,  Confessional  in- 
quiry at,  321-325 

scandalous  Statement  by  the  clergy 

of,  323-325 

secessions  to  Rome  from,  325 

Library  of  the  Fathers,  90,  133 

Lichfield  Theological  College,  388 

Liddell  v.  Westerton,  253,  264,  357- 
361 

Liddell,  Dean,  53 

Liddon,  Canon,  on  the  Evangelical 
Movement,  3,  7 

and  Cuddesdon  Theological  Col- 
lege, 391-  392 

Littledale,  Rev.  Dr.,  on  the  Protestant 
and  Catholic  Religions,  8 

on  Prayer  Book  revision,  409,  410 

Lushington,  Dr.,  307,  343,  358 
Lyne,  Mr.  Francis,  44 

Maclagan,  Archbishop,  on  Episcopal 
prosecutions,  143 

Macmullen,  Rev.  R.  G.,  65,  66 

secedes  to  Rome,  284,  285,  287 

Mai,  Cardinal,  193,  195 

Manning,  Archdeacon,  on  the  real  ten- 
dency of  Puseyism,  286 

Marriott,  Rev.  Charles,  demands  the 
prosecution  of  Rev.  J.  Garbett,  250, 

305 

on  Clerical  Retreats,  282 

Marshall,    Nathaniel,   D.D.,    his   Peni- 
tential Discipline  of  the  Primitive 
Church,  281 
Martin  v.  Mackonochie,  361 
Maskell,  Rev.  W.,  letters  on    Pusey's 

Confessional  practice,  309-312 
Maurice,  Rev.  Peter,  on  Popery  in  Ox- 
ford, lOl,  102 
Metropolitan  Church  Union,  326,  327 
Monk,    Bishop,    censures   Tract   XC, 

178 
Moresby  Faculty  Case,  The,  130,  131 
Mozley,  Rev.  J.  B.,  34,  89,   114,  238, 

239  .  . 

his  Review  of  the  Baptismal  Con- 
troversy, 303 

Mozley,  Rev.  Thomas,  54,  63,  91, 
no 

Musgrave,  Bishop,  censures  Tract  XC, 
178 

Neale,  Rev.  J.  M.,  and  Sackville  Col- 
lege, 290-292 

the  Rev.  John  Scobell's  charges 

against  the,  363-374 

sly  and  cowardly  Confessional  prac- 
tice of  the,  363-374 

Bishop  Gilbert's  stern  censure  of 

the,  365,  366 


Neale,  Rev.  J.  M.,  sad  condition  of 
young  lady  penitent  of  the,  371, 
372 

Newman,  Mr.  F.  W.,  15,  16,  24,  55 

Newman,  Rev.  J.  H.,  was  he  ever  an 
Evangelical?  13 

on  Scripture,  tradition,  and  pri- 
vate judgment,  10,  II,  14 

on  Rome  as  Babylon  and  Anti- 
christ, 14,  15 

on    the    First    Prayer   Book   of 

Edward  VL,  16 

— —  on  the  essence  of  sectarian  doc- 
trine, 9 

Lectures  on  Popular  Protestantism 

quoted,  11 

on  the  need  for  a  second  Refor- 
mation, 16 

his  secret  interview  with  Wiseman 

at  Rome,  18-21 

•  its  effect  upon  Wiseman,  19,  20 

— —  on  Church  and  State,  25 

on  subscription  to  the  Thirty-Nine 

Articles,  47,  48 

his  Elucidations  of  Dr.  Hampden  s 

Statements,  53-57 

on  the  worship  of  images,  104 

and  Tract  XC.  147-16S 

withdraws    his   censures   of    the 

Church  of  Rome,  168,  169 
"  not  to  be  trusted,"  239 

his  secession  to  Rome,  256-25S 

his  visit  to  Rome,  259-262 

when  was  he  ordained  a  Roman 

Catholic  priest  ?  259-262 

Oakeley,  Rev.  Frederick,  138-146 
at  Margaret  Chapel,  138-141 

on  the  work  he  did   there,    138, 

139 

claims  the  right  to  hold  all  Roman 

doctrine,  140,  142 

pro  ecution    and   deprivation   of, 

141-145 
on  his  idea  of  a  loyal  Churchman's 

work,  146 

his  secession  to  Rome,  146 

Oxford,  Alarming  state  of  the  Diocese 

of,  393-404 
Oxford  Martyrs'  Memorial,  109-I13 

Pusey  objects  to  it  as  "  unkind  to 

the  Church  of  Rome,"  no 

Oxford  Movement,  The,  its  founders 
not  sound  Protestants,  12 

— —was  it  born  in  Oxford  or  Rome? 
22 

the  Rev.  William  Palmer's  narra- 
tive of  its  birth,  29 

Oxford  Protestant  Magazine,  ill,  112 

Overton,  Canon,  89 


426 


INDEX 


Overton,  Canon,  on  the  difference  be- 
tween Evangelical  Churchmen  and 
Puritans,  3 

Palmer,  Rev.  William  (of  Magdalen 
College) anathematises  Protestantism, 

Palmer,    Rev,    William  (of  Worcester 

College),  19 
his  Narrative  of  Events  quoted, 

240,  241 
Papal   Aggression,  the,  314-317,  332, 

333 
Parker  Society,  the,  224,  225 
Percival,  Hon.  and  Rev.  A.  P.,  9,  32 
defends  the  Tracts  for  the  Times, 

171,  172 
Phillpotts,  Bishop,  denounces  the  Epis- 
copal Veto,  77 

censures  Tract  XC,  178 

orders  the  use  of  the  surplice  in 

the  pulpit,  248 

withdraws  his  order,  248 

• and   the    Exeter   Surplice    Riots, 

269,  270 
prosecutes  the  Rev.  W.  G.  Parks 

Smith,  288,  299 

and  the  Gorham  Case,  292-303 

threatens  to  excommunicate  the 

Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  300 

Goode's  reply  to,  301 

Piers,    Rev.    Octavius,    prosecuted   for 

"publicly    praying    in    an   unconse- 

craied  place,"  271,  272 
Pius  IX.,  his  opinion  of  Dr.  Pusey  and 

his  work,  245,  308 
secret  and  traitorous  message  from 

founders  of  A.P.U.C.  to,  356 
Poetry  Professorship   at   Oxford,  The, 

contest  for,  212-217 
Pusey's     indiscreet     interference 

with,  214,  215 
Pollen,  Rev.  J.  H.,  321 
Poole,    Rev.    Alfred,   the  Confessional 

case  against  the,  374-380 
Pope,  the,  Oxford  Tractarians  wish  to 

be  "  in  active  communion"  with,  187 
Prayer  Book  revision,  138,  409 
Dr.     Littledale    advocates,     409, 

410 
Prayers  for  the  Dead,  1 25-1 31 
Proby,  Rev.  W.  H.  B.,  on  the  Evan- 
gelical Movement,  5 
Protestantism,  anathematised  by  Rev. 

W.  Palmer,  183 
Purchas,  Rev.  John,  387,  388 
Puritans,  The,  difference  between  and 

Evangelical  Churchmen,  3 
Pusey,  Rev.  Dr.,  40,  41,  42 
joins  the  Oxford  Movement,  41 


Pusey,  Rev.  Dr.,  tries  to  prosecute  Dr. 

Hampden,  72-77 
his  early  Protestantism,  87,  88 

founds  a  Theological  Society,  88, 

his   pamphlet    on    Tendetxcies   to 

Homanistu,  1 19-125 
his  Protestant  notes  on  Auricular 

Confession,  133-135 

on  the  basis  of  Union  with  Rome, 

144,145 
his  double  dealing  about  Purgatory 

and  Invocation  of  Saints,  145 
his  sermon  on  The  Holy  Extcharist 

a  Comfort  to  tiie  Penitent,  226-234 
suspended   by  the    University  of 

Oxford,  230 

rejects  Transubstantiation,  228 

his  veracity  challenged,  230-232 

challenges  a  prosecution,  233 

Bishop  Bagot  says  it  was  not  "a 

straightforward  proceeding,"  233 
his  quotations  from  the   Fathers, 

234  . 
his    "Adapted"    Roman    books, 

241-245 
extracts  from  these  books,  242- 

244 
Pope  Pius  IX. 's  opinion  of,  245, 

308 

thinks  God  is  "drawing"  Newman 

to  Rome,  256 

his    remarkable    correspondence 

with  Bishop  Wilberforce,  265-268 

his  sermon  on  Entire  Absolution 

of  the  Penitent,  277-279 
Dean  Boyle  on  the  effect  of  Pusey's 

Confessional  work,  280 
Dr.   Hook  says  that  he  is  under 

Jesuit  influence,  268 

Hook  charges   him    with  Jesuit- 
ism, 285 

— ■ — ■  will   do    everything    for    Roman 

Catholics,  287 
exposure   by   Allies,    Dodsworth, 

and    Maskell    of    the    Confessional 

practices  of,  309-313 

Bishop  Wilberforce  inhibits,  314 

Professor  Jowett   prosecuted   by, 

417,  418 

in   praise  of  ecclesiastical  prose- 
cutions, 418 

Randall,  Dean  R.  W.,  and  the  Laving- 

ton  Case,  381-387 
Reformation,  The,  and  Justification  by 

Faith,  I,  2 
Reformers,  Dean  Church  on.  III 

Lord  Blachford  on,  iii 

Rev.  Thomas  Mozley  on,  no 


INDEX 


427 


Reformers,  The,  Keble  on,  III 

Reserve  in  Communicating  Religious 
Knowledge,  34,  132 

Extracts  from,  213 

Bishop  Wilberforce  on,  216,  217 

Restoration  of  Churches,  The,  Dr. 
Close  on,  254,  255 

Rickards,  Rev.  S.,  35 

Rivington,  Rev.  Luke,  48 

Robinson  Wright  v.  Tugwell,  248 

Romeward  Movement,  The,  Newman's 
subtle  plan  for  promoting  it,  115-117 

secret  negotiations  with  Roman- 
ists to  promote  the,  184-200,  352-357 

Rose,  Rev.  H.  J.,  148 

Russell,  Lord  John,  on  the  Hampden 
Case,  67-69 

the  Oxford  Movement  distrusted 

by,  314 

the  Durham  Letter  by,  315 

Russell,  Rev.  J.  F.,  88 

Sackville  College,  East  Grinstead, 

290-292 
Salisbury  {lushop  of)  v.   Williams,  413 
Scobell,  Rev.  John,  case  of,  against  the 

Rev.  J.  M.  Neale,  363-374 
Secret    negotiations    with    Romanists, 

184-201,  352-357 
Selborne,  Earl  of,  on  the  Evangelical 

Movement,  5 

on  the  Fathers,  91 

Seventh  Commandment,  The,  question- 
ing women  on,  defended  by  Fuseyites, 

324,  325.  37S,  379 
Shaftesbury,  Earl  of,  on  the  Evangelical 

Movement,  5 
Shore,  Rev.  James,  case  of  the,   273- 

276 
Shrewsbuiy,  Lord,  195 
Smith,    Rev.  W.  G.   Parks,  prosecuted 

by  Bishop  Phillpotts,  288,  289 
Society  of  the    Holy  Cross,  its   secret 

birth,  349 
Solicitors'  Journal,  on  Prayers  for  the 

Dead,  12S 
Sporlein,  Pastor,  scandalous  and  traitor- 
ous advice  to,  117,  118 
St.  Barnabas',  Pimlico,  340 
St.  George's   in   the    East,  Riots    and 

Disturbances  at,  405-409 
St.  Margaret's,  East  Grinstead,  363-374 
Starkey,  Rev.  Samuel,  prosecution  of, 

for  "  publicly  praying  in  an  unconse- 

crated  place,"  271,  272 
Startling  and  Treacherous  Proposal,  A, 

187-194 

particulars  sent  to  Rome,  192-196 

Stone  Altars,  condemned  as  illegal,  252, 

253.  359 


Stone  Altars,  in  the  Diocese  of  Oxford, 
394,  397,  401 

Stuart,  Rev.  Edward,  says  we  are  not 
to  "  go  direct  to  God,"  10 

refuses   to  obey  his  Bishop,  361, 

362 

Sumner,  Archbishop,  on  Non-Episco- 
pal Orders,  23 

Sumner,  Bishop,  suspicious  application 
to,  28 1,  282 

Surplice  in  the  Pulpit,  The,  Bishop 
Phillpotts  orders  its  use,  248 

withdraws  his  order,  248 

disturbances  at  Exeter,  268,  269 

Symons,  Rev.  Dr.,  Dr.  Pusey's  oppo- 
sition to,  249 

Dr.  Hook  refuses  to  vote  against, 

250 

failure  of  the  attack  on,  250 

Tablet,  The,  on  Newman's  ordination  as 

a  priest,  260 
Tail,  Archbishop,  on  Tract  XC,  154 
on    the    Judicial     Committee    of 

Privy  Council,  331 
— —  a    Declaration    in    favour    of    the 

Gorham  Judgment  signed  by,  336 
and  the  Rev.  Alfred  Poole's  Case, 

374-380 
Taylor,  Rev.  Rowland  (Martyr),  30 
Theological  College,  A,  founded  by  Dr. 

Pusey,  88,  89 
Theological  Colleges,  388-392 
Thiry-Nine  Articles,  The,  Newman  on 

subscription  to  the,  47,  48 
Keble  on  Catholic  Subscription  to, 

172-176 
Tracts  for  the   Times,  24,   31,   34,   35, 

38,  135,  167,  171,  172 

names  of  the  writers  of  the,  40 

extracts  from,  1 37- 1 39 

Mr.  John  Adolphus,  Q.C.,  on,  44 

Dr.  Hook  on,  106 

Bishop  Bagot  on,  107,  108 

Tract  XC,  147-168 

list  of  pamphlets  on,  147-149,  note 

Newman's  object  in  writing,  149 

— —  extracts  from,  1 50-152 

Romanists  delighted  at  the  publi- 
cation of,  152 

letter  of  the  Four  Tutors  on,  152, 

153 

Dr.  Arnold  on,  154 

resolution  of  the  Heads  of  Houses 

°"'  '55       .  .  . 

—    how  their  decision  was  arrived  at, 

156 
Roman    Catholic     comment    on, 

164-166 
Bishop  Bagot  and,  166-168,  222 


428 


INDEX 


Tract   XC,   Pusey's   defence   of,    176, 

Manning's  opinion  of,  177 

Episcopal  condemnations  of,  17^) 

179 
Tucker,  Rev.  J.,  398,  399 

Wakeman,  Mr.  H.  O.,  on  the  Evan- 
gelical Movement,  4,  8 
Ward,  Rev.  Richard,  and  St.  Saviour's, 

Leeds,  285,  286 
Ward,  Mr.  Wilfrid,  159,  188 
Ward,  Rev.  W.  G.,  The,  182,  248 
the   treasonable  letter  of,  to  the 

Univers,  1 60- 1 64 

defends  Tract  XC,  170,  171 

double  dealing  in  the  Church  of 

England  by,  199 

on  deception,  220 

list  of  pamphlets  on  the  case  of, 

248,  249,  note 
Wells  Theological  College,  388 
West  V.  Shrittle'worih,  127 
White,  Rev.  Blanco,  his  early  warning 

to  Newman,  16 
Wilberforce,    Bishop  Samuel,  and   the 

Hampden  case,  55-57,  65,  72-77 
on  the  perils  from  Puseyism,  2  ,9, 

240 
and  the  Rev.  T.  W.  Allies,  304- 

308 


Wilberforce,  Bishop  Samuel,  on  Pusey's 
"Adapted"  Roman  books,  242 

his     remarkable     correspondence 

with  Pusey,  265-268 

Dr.  Pusey  inhibited  by,  314 

and  Cuddesdon  Theological  Col- 
lege, 389-392 

and  the  State  of  the   Diocese  of 

Oxford,  393-404 

Williams,  Rev.  Isaac,  29 

his  contest  for  the  Poetry  Pro- 
fessorship at  Oxford,  212-21 7 

extracts  from  his  Reserve  in  Coiu- 

municating     Religious     Knowledge, 
213 

Wiseman,  Cardinal,  his  secret  interview 

with  Newman  and  Froude  in  Rome, 

18-21,  261 
its    powerful   effect   on   his    after 

life,  19,  20 

on  Froude's  Remains,  20,  104 

on  IVact  XC,  165 

visits    the  Tractarian    leaders    at 

Oxford,  191,  192 

secret     negotiations     with      the 

Romanisers  by,  191 

Wright,  Rev.  Dr.  W  illiam,  387 


YoRKSHiRjc    Church    Union,   The, 
Hook  refuses  to  join,  330 


THE    END 


Printed  by  Ballantyne,  Hanson  &»  Co. 
Edinburgh  6=  London 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 

Renewed  books  are  subjea  to  immediate  recall. 


LD  21A-50to-4,'60 
(A9562sl0)476B 


General  Library     . 
Universiry  of  California 
Berkeley 


